https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?

R=19870014423 2020-03-20T10:26:59+00:00Z

78977

DOT/FAA/CT-86/40

Aircraft Electromagnetic Compatibility

~

(USA-CR-181051) AIRCBA?T BL€C!TEOIAGIBIIC us 7-23856

CCIPATXBILITX Pima1 Baport, Sep. 1985 June
19437 ( B o e h g Ccrmrcial Airplane Co-) 146
-
F Avail: O f l S EC 407/IJP A01 CSCL 20n Uaclas
G3/32 0078857

Clifton A. Clarke
Boeing Commercial Airplane Company
Seattle, WA 98124

William E. Larsen
FAA Technical Field Office
Moffett Field, CA 94035

Final Report

June 1987

This document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, VA 22161

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration

FAA Technical Center

Atlantic City, NJ 08405
 Aircraft Electromagnetic Compatibility

Clifton A. Clarke
Boeing Commercial Airplane Company
Seattle, WA 98124

William E. Larsen
FAA Technical Field Office
Moffett Field, CA 94035

.
a
 FOREWORD

This document is based on work performed by the Boeing Commercial Airplane Company,
P.O.Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124, under NASA contract NAS2-12261 for the Fed-
eral Aviation Administration, NASNAmes Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035. The
contract was firm fmed price, level-of-effort term from September 1985 to September 1986
with an extension to June 1987. Contracting officers were W. C. Botts, Boeing and A. N.
Johnson, NASA. The FAA contracting officer’s technical representative was William E. Lar-
sen. Deliverables were an Interim Report (Draft) and an Interim Report (Final). The pro-
gram manager was Robert D. Force, and principal investigator, Clifton A. Clarke.

Bob Force, who helped put the program together, played a central part in managing the
planning and organization of the total document. The Section 2.1, “Existing Systems,” is
derived from the valuable “Active Controls Technology” report which Bob co-authored. Bill
Larsen provided extensive expertise taken from his own experience, and through construc-
tive source material. He also provided sound and highly regarded recommendations for con-
tent and organization. Dale R. Reed collaborated on the wiringinduced voltages and worked
some of the indepth computations. He offered very profitable perspectives on the approach to
aircraft engineering analysis and design; his forbearance and tenacity are appreciated.

Special contributions were made by John “inner and John Bishop who consulted on signifi-
cant aircraft test and troubleshooting procedures, helping to fill in the picture of aircraft
electromagnetic interference. Veteran EMC engineers who supplied valued and time-tested
data that form a part of this report were Jerry Carter, John Foster, and George Ketterling.
Thanks are also due those individuals mentioned or quoted in the text.

Many people contributed important comments and helpful criticisms to the Interim Report
(Draft). Chris Kendall supplied valuable consultations and comments along with Roger Mc-
Connell of CKC Associates. Henrietta Gilbert, FAA; Richard Hess, Sperry Corp.; Russell
Carstensen, Naval Air Systems Command; and Kary Miller of Collins generously took time
to review and comment with useful corrections and suggestions. My thanks are also owed to
Nancy Clarke for helpful editorial comments. Fellow EMC engineers Glenn Olson, Kieth
Kalanquin, Charles King, and Sy O’Young (who worked on the proposal) contributed their
thoughts.

The document format and graphics were expertly delineated by Primo Mattieligh and drawn
by Irene Ohashi. Their generosity and patience are much appreciated. Gary Breidenstein
offered expert aid in the editing, and was a source of inspiration in the preparation of the
final copy. Nancy Eaton not only supervised the typing, but helped proof the manuscript.

This document would not be possible without the unparalleled IEEE Symposium Records
and the periodical “ITEM’, R & B Enterprises, whose presentations were a source of valu-
able data applicable to an aircraft. I am collectively indebted.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Background and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 A Case of Engine Shutdown. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.2 Electromagnetic Compatibility ................................... 2
1.2 Electromagnetic Compatibility Priorities ................................ 7
1.2.1 Responsibilities and Policies ..................................... 7
1.2.2 Documentation ................................................. 10
1.3 How to Use This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.0 AIRPLANE AVIONICS AND CRITICALITIES ............................... 13

2.1 Existing Systems .................................................... 13
2.2 Future Aircraft ..................................................... 28
2.3 Criticalities ......................................................... 37
2.3.1 Measures and Definitions ........................................ 37
2.3.2 Critical Equipment ............................................. 38
2.4 Packaging and Architecture ........................................... 40
2.5 Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
2.5.1 An Early Start ................................................. 43
2.5.2 Design ........................................................ 44
2.5.3 Environment and Test .......................................... 44
2.6 Variances in Electromagnetic Compatibility ............................. 46
2.6.1 Diagnostics and Troubleshooting ................................. 46
2.6.2 %able of Variances .............................................. 48
2.6.3 Corrective Action and Modeling .................................. 48

3.0 AVIONICS THRESHOLDS AND PROTECTION .............................. 53

3.1 Hardware Tolerance ................................................. 53
3.2 EM1 and Software ................................................... 55
3.3 Digital and Discrete Circuits .......................................... 57
3.3.1 ARINC 429 Drivers and Receivers ................................ 57
3.3.2 Circuit and Shield Grounds ...................................... 58
3.3.3 Discretes ...................................................... 60
3.4 Equipmentmiring Isolation and Separation ............................. 60
3.4.1 Quality of Wiring Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3.4.2 Power and Energy Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.4.3 EMC Quality in Maintenance .................................... 67
3.4.4 Shielding and Shield Ties........................................ 68
3.5 Aircraft Protection Measures .......................................... 68
3.5.1 Structure Conductivity .......................................... 68
3.5.2 Shielding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.5.3 Safety in Grounding and Returns ................................. 77
3.5.4 Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.5.5 Resonance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
3.6 Composites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

ii
 4.0 EMC ANALYSIS AND ENVIRONMENT .................................... 87
4.1 Radiated Environment ............................................... 87
4.1.1 Radio Frequency Field Distribution ............................... 87
4.1.2 Magnetic and Electric Field Distribution ........................... 93
4.1.3 Transients .................................................... 96
4.2 Aircraft Protection ................................................... 97
4.2.1 Shielding and Ground Reference .................................. 97
4.2.2 Apertures and Electrical Bonding ................................. 99
4.2.3 External Wiring Interface Circuits ................................ 99
4.2.4 Circuit Protection .............................................. 100
4.3 Trades ............................................................. 101

. 5.0 ACTIVITIES AND DOCUMENTS .......................................... 107

5.1 SpecificationsDocuments ............................................. 107
5.2 TasksIActivities ..................................................... 108

6.0 EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION ........................................... 111

6.1 New and Existing ................................................... 111
6.2 Aircraft Equipment Categories ........................................ 112
6.3 Suppliers ........................................................... 114

7.0 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION ....................................... 117

7.1 Key EMC Designs ................................................... 117
7.2 Validation Plans ..................................................... 117
7.3 Validation Procedure ................................................. 118
7.4 Program Design Reviews .............................................. 120

8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................ 123

APPENDIX A Glossary of Terms ............................................... 131

APPENDIX B Test and Test Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

 .

LIST OF FIGURES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
E-1 Postulated Percentages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
1.1-1 Representative EM1 Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1-2 EM1 Environment in Aircraft ..................................... 4
1.1-3 Percent Troubleshooting-NC ..................................... 5
1.1-4 Electromagnetic Interference Effects ............................... 5
1.1-5 Radio Frequency Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2-1 Cost-Effective Subsystem Testing .................................. 8
1.2-2 Key EMC Facilitators ............................................ 9
1.3-1 Representative “E” Field Coupling ................................. 11
2.1-1 Present-Day Aircraft Systems ..................................... 14
2.1-2 Avionics Bays ................................................... 15
2.1-3 Wiring ........................................................ 15
2.1-4 Main Bay Aluminum Structure .................................... 15
2.1-5 Structure Return ................................................ 16
2.1-6 InducedNoise .................................................. 16
2.1-7 Noise Voltages .................................................. 17
2.1-8 Nonmetallic Interfaces .1. ......................................... 17
2.1-9 Separation Example ............................................. 19
2.1-10 Flight Control Autopilot Redundancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.1-11 Electronic Engine Control ........................................ 20
2.1-12 TransmittersReceivers ........................................... 20
2.1-13 Flight Instrument System ........................................ 21
2.1-14 Roll Control System ............................................. 21
2.1-15 Navigation ..................................................... 22
2.1-16 Communication ................................................. 23
2.1-17 Line Replaceable Unit ........................................... 24
2.1-18 Flight Management Systems ...................................... 25
2.1-19 EquipmentAViring Location Complexities ........................... 27
2.1-20 Radiated Emission ............................................... 28
2.2-1 EMC and Aircraft Systems Development ............................ 29
2.2-2 Data Bus Architecture ........................................... 29
2.2-3 Line-of-Sight Display and Voice Control ............................. 30
2.2-4 Hypothetical Architecture ........................................ 31
2.2-5 Data Bus Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.2-6 Digital Data Buses .............................................. 32
2.2-7 Performance and Status Monitors .................................. 33
2.2-8 Microprocessor Evolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.2-9 Avionics Technology Progress ...................................... 34
2.2-10 Materials Distribution ........................................... 35
2.2-11 1990s ATC Implementation ....................................... 35
2.3-1 Probability Versus Consequence ................................... 39
2.3-2 Three-Stage Subsystem Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.3-3 Projected Criticalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.6-1 A Discrepancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
2.6-2 Postulated Hallmarks of Variances ................................. 51
3.1-1 Microcircuit Tolerance ........................................... 54
3.1-2 Noise Margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

iv
.
3.2-1 Transient Events ................................................ 56
3.3.1 Circuit Noise Rejection (a b c d e D ................................. 59
3.4-1 Circuit Response to EM1.......................................... 61
3.4-2 Wiring Categories ............................................... 63
3.4-3 Critical Circuits Wire Separation .................................. 64
3.4-4 Selected EM1 Levels ............................................. 66
3.4-5 Laboratory Test Setup ............................................ 67
3.4-6 ShieldTies ..................................................... 69
3.5-1 The Grounding Steps ............................................ 69
3.5-2 Structure EMC Roles ............................................ 70
3.5-3 Details and Installation .......................................... 72
3.5-4 The Seven Earth Ground Connections .............................. 73
3.5-5 EMC. Anatomy Block Diagram .................................... 73
3.5-6 Magnetic Field SE of Aluminum ................................... 74
3.5-7 Loss of SE with Joint Finish ...................................... 74
3.5-8 SE Comparison ................................................. 75
3.5-9 Wire SE Comparison at HF-VHF .................................. 76
3.5-10 Material/Configuration SE Overview ............................... 76
3.5-11 Power Returns .................................................. 77
3.5-12 MaterialEesistance Overview ..................................... 79
3.5-13 Configuratioflesistance Overview ................................. 80
3.5-14 Resistance Plot-Copper Plane ..................................... 81
3.5-15 Resistance Versus Pressure ....................................... 81
3.5-16 Joint Finish Resistance .......................................... 82
3.5-17 Aircraft and Strap Resonance ..................................... 83
3.6-1 Typical Nonmetallic Applications ................................... 83
3.6-2 Graphite-Epoxy Resistance ........................................ 84
3.6-3 Graphite-Epoxy SE Shortfall ...................................... 85
3.6-4 Graphite-Epoxy Details and Installation ............................ 85
4.1-1 HF-VHFRange ................................................. 88
4.1-2 Selected RF Fields: HF-VHF Range ................................ 88
4.1-3 Expected Wire Voltage-Eight Feet ................................. 89
4.1-4 Environments, Safety, and Test .................................... 89
4.1-5 A Transistor Threshold........................................... 90
4.1-6 Representative Coax Voltage Coupling .............................. 90
4.1-7 Representative Secondary Coupling ................................ 91
4.1-8 Graphite-Epoxy or A1 Shielding Added .............................. 91
4.1-9 “H” Field Coupling .............................................. 93
4.1-10 “E” Field Coupling .............................................. 94
4.1-11 Coupling Versus Separation ....................................... 94
4.1-12 Magnetic Fields ................................................. 95
4.1-13 Transient Ringing ............................................... 96
4.1-14 Electrical lkansients ............................................. 97
4.2-1 Layered Design ................................................. 98
4.3-1 Trade-Equipment Location ....................................... 102
4.3-2 Trade-Wire LengtWSeparation .................................... 103
4.3-3 Trade-Digital Circuits ........................................... 104
B-1 EM1 Test Limits (SH1.2. 3,4) .................................... 142

V
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Aircraft Electromagnetic Compatibility guidelines document deals with electromagnetic

compatibility in a commercial transport aircraft: the specifications, the activities, the design,
and the tests to verify and validate compatibility.

Objectives are to view architecture, equipment and wiring location, material properties, cir-
cuit susceptibilities, and environment as seen from the electromagnetic compatibility design
perspective of balanced circuits, filters, electrical bonding, grounding, and shielding.

Even today digital electronics are much more common in aircraft. Automated flight controls of
future aircraft will operate under the control of digital clocks, data buses, switching regula-
tors, pulse width modulated power, and radio frequency transmitters on the one hand, and on
the other, sensitive analog and digital instrumentation.

Safe and efficient flight will depend on the performance of electronics. It will be important to
understand the electromagnetic interference types and the electromagnetic interference paths
(figure El).

TYPE PATH

400 HZ
Electrostatic

/ !l%?i~ield
Coupling 15%
30%

Radio Power
XFMR Frequency 15%
Common
Field HF-VHF Mode
Coupling 20% Impedance
5% 10%
Grounds
5O/o

Figure E- 1 Postulated Percentages

The EM1 types are set forth in this document by showing a profile of the magnetic and electric
fields from power lines; some military, urban, and rural radio frequency field strengths; and
the properties of transients. Significance of the wire circuit return, the balanced circuit,
grounding, shielding, and software highlight the protection techniques of a layered design
which will block paths of electromagnetic interference and maintain interface signal quality.
Design specifications, activities, and reviews are proposed to help set up guidelines for equip-
ment verification and aircraft validation.

vi
 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE

1.1.1 A Case of Engine Shutdown

Captain Hoag thought briefly of the moment when he left home last night. His son, daughter,
and wife were all there. They had joked about their planned upcoming vacation, their first
together in two years.

A voice broke into his short reverie: “Flight 211, you’re low and to the left-please maintain
023-you have a cell at 2 o’clock.”

Hoag said to the first officer, John Pearson: “John, push it forward and bring ‘er up.”

John said: “Gotcha covered. I flew one of these new ones two weeks ago into Loridan
International-they sure do handle smoothly.”
..
“Okay-uh huh.” “Gear down.”

Flight 211, Atlantic Air, was on approach to Keithrode International Airport (KIA). It was
16:45 on October 16. Two hundred and twenty-seven passengers were on board. The weather
had been partly cloudy with thunderstorms predicted and cell activity in the proximity of the
air terminal.

Tower: “Flight 211, you are cleared on Runway 3. You are still low.”

Captain Hoag: “John, bring ’er up.”

A lightning flash occurred off to the left. Then, instantly, a blinding flash, an overwhelming
shudder, and the aircraft metal structure and body seemed to vibrate under a massive pres-
sure and energy wave.

Hoag: “We’ve lost number l! Push it all the way forward!”

Pearson: “Okay”

Hoag: “All the way forward-all the way forward-oh.”

The plane hit the earth with a great screech, scrape, a shower of sparks, and a grinding of
metal. It then rose again, lumbering and awry, as if struggling to be airborne-struggling-
then it smashed again to the ground. The tail buckled. Flames broke out.

Fifty-six people were killed, including the crew. A number were injured.

HYPOTHESIS NO. 1: The piercing lightning strike to the left-hand engine caused a large
atmospheric pressure wave. This wave traveled through the engine intake into the main
engine chamber and snuffed out the flame, and thus the engine power.

1
HYPOTHESIS NO. 2: The lightning strike to the engine established a large electrical current
flow in the engine structure and cowling. Electrical circuits connected to the structure experi-
enced voltage transients causing valve malfunction and leading t o an engine shutdown.

This case is dramatic. It is awesome. It commands attention. We recognize that we must

protect against this type of event, model it, and develop reiterative computations and tests to
uncover the boundaries of transient energies invading important electrical circuits.

This case is given to illustrate the contrast between a very visible and threatening electrical
upset or damage phenomenon and the usual run of invisible electromagnetic interference
(EM11 that few airline passengers know about. Normal electromagnetic interference environ-
mental problems ordinarily have not carried with them the drama of the case above. Aircraft
have been constructed with controls and electrical apparatus having electromagnetic interfer-
ence problems, but not having any influence on safety.

Knowledge of and protection against induced noise voltages are necessary today and will be
even more necessary in future aircraft where vital and critical control functions are being
taken over by avionics interconnected by digital data buses that could impair safety if beset by
electrical noise. We need access to knowledge of the various types of noise. There is a growing
awareness of electromagnetic interference and electromagnetic compatibility (EMC).

1.1.2 Electromagnetic Compatibility

Electromagnetic interference could cause a flight delay or endanger the operation of an air-
craft at 30,000 feet. Generators of electromagnetic interference for aircraft (figure 1.1-1)take
on several forms:
1) Transmitters of radio frequencies that may be installed on the aircraft itself, such as
high-frequency (HF) or very high frequency (VHF) communication links, or high-energy
sources located on the ground such as our everyday frequency modulated (FM) radio or
HF-VHF-UHF broadcast stations
2) The aircraft power line 400-Hz electric and magnetic fields
3) The computer and avionics microprocessor timing and control clock signal circuits that
generate radio frequencies of one MHz or higher
4) The aircraft power switching regulators which are used to convert from one level of
power to another
5) Electrical switching transients sparked by the turn on and off of aircraft lights, fans, and
engines or by the operation of control surfaces, ailerons, slats, and flaps
6) Electrostatic discharges including lightning

These transients and electromagnetic waves may transfer into wiring and cause “electromag-
netic interference” to microcircuits inside electrical equipment and avionics, possibly result-
ing in a trifling disorder in a flight deck display or, more seriously, an engine shutdown.

The conductive paths of electrical wiring provide an avenue to usher electromagnetic interfer-
ence directly to airplane avionics and signal inputs. Eliminate wiring, and electromagnetic
interference almost vanishes. Wiring is the most important factor in electromagnetic interfer-
ence and electromagnetic compatibility. Of much lesser importance is the electromagnetic

2
THREE BASIC EM1 SOURCES TEN SPECIFIC EM1 SOURCES

ELECTROSTATIC
.. I
TRANSIENTS
”1 MHr” RESONANT
------
1
FREQUENCY

,\\
LIGHTNING .;-, --
VOLTAGE
POTENTIALDROP

Figure 1.1- 1 Representative EM1 Sources

interference path through the avionic equipment metal housing or case. Wiring is the electri-
cal interface and connection between avionic equipment. Its designated job is to transfer avi-
onics signals, data, and information. But, in that function, it can often act to transfer
electromagnetic interference energy to other wires in a wire bundle. It also sprays or radiates
like a transmitting antenna and very efficiently receives radio frequency energy like a receiv-
ing antenna.

Recently, a n experienced electromagnetic compatibility engineer, “an old hand,” was asked,
“What’s the number one requirement for an electromagnetic compatibility design program
that will rule out electromagnetic interference problems?”

His answer, “Zero net current flow in a shielded, balanced, isolated circuit.” In other words,
always route the signal wire and return or the power wire and its return together - twisted
pair, coax, or shielded pair, which means that aircraft basic structure is not used as the return
path for the circuit (figure 1.1-2). This will almost eliminate the three electromagnetic inter-
ference avenues of entry: common mode impedance paths, magnetic field coupling, and elec-
tric field coupling. (Common mode impedance conditions exist when two circuits share a
portion of the same electrical path.)

So, that’s it: Use a return wire and use a shield for each circuit.

3
 Figure 1.1-2 EM/ Environment in Aircraft

Without good shielding, the results are predictable. Removing the shield from the circuit and
separating the return from the signal wire not only destroys the efficiency of the circuit, it
also opens up the circuit to intervention from stray electric and magnetic fields providing an
avenue directly to the microprocessor memories, computers, and controllers that are needed
for aircraft operation and for processing and control of flight deck displays and instruments. A
recent estimate of airplane problems (figure 1.1-3)indicates that power line electric and mag-
netic field coupling (30%) radio frequency fields (20%), transients (E%), and common mode
impedance paths (10%)make up a total of 75% of deficiencies. These can be largely corrected
with proper wiring design. Electromagnetic interference may occur in many of the aircraft
subsystems (figure 1.1-4). If uncontrolled, it appears as radio tones, static, or 400-Hzhum on
the passenger entertainment systems. It can show up as flight deck display distortion or
illegibility, impaired data transmittals, computer memory loss, and may even result in sus-
pension of equipment operation. Radio frequencies are becoming more of a concern. 'Ibday, the
predominant radio frequency fields that impair avionic equipment operation fall into the HI?-
VHF radio frequency spectrum (figure 1.1-5); in future aircraft, the range may vary. (See
Section 8.0, Bibliography, ECAC Study.) Electromagnetic compatibility requirements encom-
pass almost every subsystem on an aircraft.

4
 ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALrrV
Transformer Fields

10%)

Figure 1.1-3 Percent Foubleshooting-NC

MODE CONTROL PANEL

LOSS OF AUTOPILOT

ELECTRONICATTITUOE
DIRECTOR INDICATOR
LIGHT FLICKER 'LLECIBLE

MOVEMENT NOSE WHEEL

ACTUATOR MOVEMENT

Figure 1.1-4 Electromagnetic lnterference Effects

5
 I ‘I I
I
HF-VHF SPECTRUM I
I
I
I I
I !

AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD SAFETY LEVELS I

SPAN OF LOWEST LEVELS I
I
I RADAR
ALTIMETER
I
I I
1 I
I

I AUTOMATIC DIRECTION
FINDER (ADF)
I I
I
HF COMMUNICATION

PUBLIC SAFETY “C’

I WEATHER
I
US”
RADAR

“c“
I GLIDESLoPE BAND
-
AM RADIO
BROFDCAST
I
I
POLICE FIRE
SERVICES - CH
2 8
CH
7 1 3
fI rI BAND BAND
RADAR RADAR RADAR

I 1 I I I Ill1 I I I I Ill I I IIll I I I 1 II

1 2 3 4 5878911 2 3 4 5678911 2 3 4 5678911 2 3 4 567891

I l l I l l 1 I I I I Ill 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I
4 3 2 98785 4 3 2 198765 4 3 2 198765 4 3 2
I

Figure 1.1-5 Radio Frequency Range

The field of electromagnetic compatibility is not only a discipline in itself, it is also the proper
application of other engineering technologies. Good engineering design techniques employed
in the areas of avionics, wiring and cabling, electrical bonding and grounding, lightning pro-
tection, and others, go a long way in achieving electromagnetic compatibility. Electromagnetic
fields are produced by the generation, transmission, and utilization of electrical energy. Stray
electromagnetic energy is generally not desired, and quite often interferes with the operation
of electricaYelectronic equipment, hence, the name electromagnetic interference. Control spec-
ifications for electromagnetic interference generation and electromagnetic interference sus-
ceptibility are required to achieve electromagnetic compatibility. With proper wiring,
shielding, and application of voltage limiters in a good electromagnetic compatibility design,
there is increased confidence in equipment operation which converts directly to the bottom
line of on-time dispatch for the airlines and their passengers.

The steps to reach electromagnetic compatibility in an airline are basically threefold: 1) pro-
cure equipment and wiring according to EMC specifications, 2) package the equipment and
wiring in the aircraft to obtain protection from structure, and 3)measure and test the equip-
ment and wiring for all aspects of EM1 during the program to guarantee verification and
validation of EMC (See Section 7.0, Verification and Validation.)

EMC specifications for the commercial airplane are covered by Federal Aviation Regulations
and are specified in terms of system operation. FAR, Part 25.1353,Paragraph A, covers elec-
trical equipment: “Electrical equipment controls and wiring must be installed so that opera-
tion of any one unit or system of units will not adversely affect the simultaneous operation of
any other electrical unit or system essential to safe operation.”

6
Federal Aviation Regulation, Part 25.1431, Paragraph C, covers electronic equipment: “Radio
and electronic equipment, controls and wiring must be installed so that operation of any one
unit or system of units will not adversely affect the simultaneous operation of any other radio
or electronic unit or system of units, required by this chapter.”

Environmental and emission control specifications for electronic equipment intended for
installation in aircraft are documented in the current revision of “Radio Qchnical Commis-
sion for Aeronautics” (RTCA) Environmental Specification DO-160. (See Section 5.0 and
Appendix B.)
1.2 ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY PRIORITIES

1.2.1 Responsibilities and Policies

A new airplane presents a challenge of equipment location, packaging, assessment of environ-

ment and resolution of new technology problems. The airframe manufacturer takes on the
responsibility in the electromagnetic compatibility design to outline the operational-temporal-
spatial anatomy of the airplane early in the conceptual stage. It is a difficult and extensive
task. (See Section 4.2 and 4.3.)

Equipment location, wiring, transmitters, receivers, 400-Hzpower, lightning diversion, and

static dissipation are all familiar items to be pursued, tracked down, identified, and recorded.
They absorb many labor hours.

Even with the rapid advance of technology, many components, characteristics, and parameters
on a new airplane do not change. The electromagnetic compatibility engineer has a responsi-
bility to know the off-the-shelf equipment. A productive policy is to seek out and rely on
existing specifications and designs to the greatest extent possible, thereby sidestepping dupli-
cation of effort in analysis, scheduling, and testing. EMI test levels documented in the current
issue of the RTCA Document DO-160, in many instances, represent today’s environment.
(They do not take into account the affects of new composite structures.) The test levels have
been developed over the years. Airframe manufacturers and subcontractors can take good
advantage of existing specifications and test data.

So, the first priority of the airframe manufacturer is to take on the task of defining the
electromagnetic compatibility anatomy-existing equipment, new equipment, new environ-
ment, and locations.

Location often sets the electromagnetic compatibility requirements for avionics. Electronics or
lack of it influences design requirements for equipment. (See Section 6.0.)

The first priority of the avionics supplier or subcontractor (including inhouse suppliers) is to
know the electromagnetic interference environment and then identify, design, and protect
each power input and signal input to guarantee that the equipment will operate within perfor-
mance standards in that environment. The designer must shoulder the responsibility of know-
ing the interface wiring; often the designer is concerned with operational requirements and
must make a special effort to recognize the noise requirements. DO-160 is the basic industry
standard. (See Section 3.4.2 and Appendix B.)

The airframe manufacturer deals with new materials and properties, wiring, electrical bond-
ing, shielding effectiveness, and definition of environment.

7
The avionics supplier deals with input/output circuit protection, internal grounding, circuit
card layout, and interface wiring. The supplier must observe in a real-time interactive setting
the board-level noise thresholds to ensure no “state changes” and to ensure adequate contain-
ment of electromagnetic interference at the box level. The equipment engineer designs devices
to be tolerant to magnetic fields from 400-Hz power (400-mV induced), 400-Hz electric field (up
to lOOOV induced in test), radio frequencies (1V induced), transients from coils and lightning
(SOOV), and electrostatic discharge (10,OOOV or higher). Future aircraft having critical fly-by-
wire systems may require higher levels, especially for radio frequency fields. The designer
must also install filters to control and contain emissions from oscillator and switching regula-
tor clock and harmonic radio frequencies. Interface wiring must be designed and agreed upon
and documented in an interface control drawing, otherwise hardware would require multiple
electromagnetic interference designs.

Along with the size of a new program and the extent of its new technology, three pivotal
factors influence the level of effort and are sine qua non to success: 1) management support, 2)
the electromagnetic compatibility engineer’s product experience, and 3) the electromagnetic
compatibility experience of other participating engineers on the program. Management sup-
port means setting the priority for early resolution of requirements before formal document
release of vendor technical specifications and statements of work. Product experience means
minimum duplication and maximum productive effort. Experienced participating engineers
means satisfactory coverage of subcontractor requirements, good electrical bonding and wir-
ing practices.

On a recent airplane development program, extensive subsystem testing was performed on

engineering models and also production models with these three recognized benefits: 1) proof
and verification of equipment performance, 2) good diagnostic testing, and 3) knowledge of
equipment operation. Diagnostic/troubleshooting tests can be run in cooperation with the sub-
contractor. Subsystem testing is becoming a key element in a successful program (figure 1.2-1).
(See Section 7.0.)

of Operation and
Performance

Figure 7.2-7 Cost-Effective Subsystem Testing

8
Entering into a new program incurs a commitment effort (figure 1.2-21,a commitment sized by
the new technology and environment, and a commitment that dissipates with the settling of
each subcontractor requirement, each design, each test, and each verification. Early adoption
and documentation of known steps for successful electromagnetic compatibility are estab-
lished on these baseline technical priorities: 1)zero net current flow in a balanced, isolated,
shielded circuit, 2) total, all-inclusive electrical bonding of every structure and every detail
(including conductive paint on external dielectric surfaces), and 3) optimum avionic equipment
inline design and location making maximum use of structural shielding.

Communication Net
Between Current”

Documents-DO-1 60

Effective Early Document

figure 7.2-2 Key EMC facilitators

9
1.2.2 Documentation

To provide a foundation, baseline, reference, and continuity, there are these key documents:
system level specification (possibly a paragraph or two), electromagnetic compatibility plan
(may be brief), electromagnetic compatibility requirements (extensive and detailed), procure-
ment specifications (with statements of work), interface identification, equipment test (proce-
dure and report), and airplane test (procedure and report). (See Section 5.0 and 6.0).

Procurement specifications must be finalized before contract formal approval.

The fact that minimum documentation leads to a more productive program is as fundamental
as the fact that there are certain program top documents that must be instituted to define
scope and intent and to reference industry specifications. The documentation of many of the
tasks, analyses, and tests on a program can be covered by brief individual memorandums or
reports. Some programs issue design notes, a practice that is a n efficient method of recording
and disseminating design requirements, rationale, and information.

1.3 HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT

The purpose c this Aircraft Electromagnetic Compatibility document is to digest, unj , high-
light, and give perspective to the substantive aspects of electromagnetic compatibility applied
to a commercial transport aircraft. The material in this document is not new. A very impor-
tant resource to the electromagnetic compatibility engineer is the electromagnetic compatibil-
ity knowledge of other individuals associated with a program. Beliefs exist t h a t
graphite-epoxy is a n insulator; that box-to-box radiation is important (it is the interface wiring
that is the key to EMC); that shield tie (pigtail) length is not critical; that every single inter-
face line does not need to be analyzed for protection and emission control; that ground planes
are not required; that single-point grounding is always good (it is good for power, but not good
for digital circuitry); and that extensive verification procedures can be ignored and are not
essential.

The 1970s and 1980s have seen a striking rise in the quality and extent of EMC/EMI design
engineering knowledge that has important consequences for EMC. This document attempts to
collect and apply that information to the airplane. Derivations and fundamentals of EMC are
not elucidated. This document is limited in that sense. Reference can be made to the bibliogra-
phy for some excellent articles.

10
EMC information not found herein:
Fundamentals or basics of EMC
Formulas, models, derivations
Antenna-to-antenna coupling
Power system quality
Lightning

EMC information included

Aircraft-applied EMC
Architecture, equipment layout
Dominant EMI environments
Circuit susceptibilities
Bonding, grounding, shielding
Wiring design
Verification, validation
It is recommended that this document be read through before concentrating on specific sec-
tions. This document is not a design document or a “design cookbook.” It in no way can replace
specific analysis and design effort. It is a set of guidelines to outline and scope deficiencies and
qualities in present day aircraft that may aid in the approach to future designs. The informa-
tion and data is illustrative and advisory to provide definition and make comparisons of para-
metric properties and behavior, and it is not for use or adaptation to specific designs. For
example, Figure 1.3-1 maps the expected voltages induced in a single aircraft wire circuit
(having resistive loads) from an adjacent 115V,400-Hzpower wire where both have their
returns in aircraft structure. This figure illustrates the signifkance of length of coupling,
resistive loads, and gives a rough estimate of amplitudes. But, there are other interacting
parameters that might be considered; ergo, each circuit type in the aircraft must be evaluated
separately.

115V, 400 Hz

Resistance)
1ov ibfi 7

1v
Induced
Voltage
100 mV

10 mV

I I I I
0.1 ft 10cm 1 ft lm loft 10m 100ft lOOm
Wire Coupling Length

figure 1.3-7 Representative “E” field Coupling

11
Much emphasis on wiring design exists herein. The soul of EMC is a balanced, isolated,
shielded interface circuit. It closes the door on EMI. It rejects transients, radio frequencies,
and 400-Hzfields. It is practically impervious to conductive, inductive, and capacitive transfer
of energy.

Linearity rises as one of the elegant attributes of electromagnetics, giving simplicity t o varia-
tions in the electromagnetic dependent and independent parameters: length, height, resist-
ance, voltage, time, over much of their range. These parameters often vary on a 1:l ratio (20
dB per decade) or an exponential ratio, possibly 40 dB per decade. The linear relationship
breaks down or changes at corner frequencies, 3 dB points, and resonant nodes where the
dominance of electrical parameters make a transition from one to the other.

Ratios and the decibel relationship will be used throughout. The decibel, abbreviated dB, is a
unit expressing the ratio between two amounts of power, P, and P2, existing at two points. By
definition, the number of dB equals 10 log to the base 10 (P,divided by P2).For special cases
where P2 equals 1mW or lW, the dB ratio is defined as “dBm” or “dBW.” For power, a factor of
10 equals 10 dB. Since power P equals V2 divided by R, or I2 times R, decibels can be used to
express voltage and current ratios where the voltages and currents are measured at places
having identical impedances. By definition, dB equals 20 log of (VI divided by V2), and dB
equals 20 log (I, divided by 12). For convenience, V2 or I, are often chosen as 1 pV, and 1 PA,
and the dB ratio defined as dB above a microvolt or dB above a microamp. Also for conven-
ience, these ratios are more often used whether or not they are referenced to identical impe-
dances. A factor of 10 equals 20 dB. Memorize these voltage-current ratios: 6 dB = 2X, 10 dB
= 3X, 12 dB = 4,20dB = 10,40dB = 100, and 60 dB = 1000.

12
 2.0 AIRPLANE AVIONICS AND CRITICALITIES

2.1 EXISTING SYSTEMS

One-hundred and fifty paying passengers or more; flight attendants; airline competition;
scheduled dispatch; fixed cost; aisleways; lavatories; galleys; and video entertainment: These
are the well-known hallmarks of a commercial transport aircraft (figure 2.1-1).

The necessary control of capital cost and running expenses, the need for quick and easy equip-
ment maintenance, and the desire for on-time dispatch: these goals urge the airframe manu-
facturer to focus on a well-designed, well-planned electrical architecture, including
electromagnetic compatibility. Standardized avionic “line replaceable units” are motivation
for low cost and competition among subcontractors (figure 2.1-2). Cost, airworthiness, and
safety are the critical drivers for avionics.

Most passengers are unaware of the safety built into the interface wiring and electricall
electronic systems (figure 2.1-3). Passenger and crew safety, with regard to protection from
hazards of high voltages, has been guaranteed historically by the ubiquitous aluminum hous-
ings, spars, supports, and structure. The high-quality structural aluminum grounding paths
inherently are the electrical return or an electrical reference for digital signals, shield ties,
motor power current, and fault currents (figure 2.1-4). This structure bypasses the need for
separately installed wires or buses to fulfill those functions (figure 2.1-5).Also enhancing the
electrical sinking and conducting properties of structure are the extensive air-conditioning,
. water, and hydraulic systems that form a skeleton of metallic and composite materials
throughout the flight deck, cabin, cargo bay, wheelwells, and wing leading and trailing edges.
Many of these shielding and sinking properties today help to contain or divert electromagnetic
interference from electronic game signals, electrostastic discharge, lightning transients, and
high-energy broadcast radio frequencies (figure 2.1-6 and 2.1-7).

Aluminum alloys form the wing, fuselage, and empennage structure, but these metal alloys
must mate with materials like fiberglass, Kevlar, and moderately conductive materials like
graphite-epoxy. The interfaces at fairings, doors, ducting, and fasteners open up possibilities of
apertures and gaps. These mating surfaces must be electrically bonded so that power currents,
fault currents, electrostatic charge, and lightning currents flow (figure 2.1-8).

With each new program, we build on the safety and electromagnetic compatibility practices of
past experience and, as the program progresses, we purchase and install units of avionic
equipment which were designed and built and tested years ago-existing equipment, “off-the-
shelf’ equipment. So, years of inservice experience with existing equipment are brought to-
gether with the new technology designs on the new program. We cannot overlook the fact that
electromagnetic compatibility and safety standards have been well established. Hence, this
document does not hold any revealing secrets or creative innovations. Many of the require-
ments for electromagnetic compatibility are very well known having been spawned, tried, and
steadily refined over the years.

With an experienced eye on airworthiness and reliability, traditional electrical and electronic
functions have been carefully shaped by the airframe manufacturer and subcontractors to
provide and enhance engine instrumentation (safety), communication and navigational aids
(safety and convenience), autopilot equipment (pilot workload), and aircraft utilities (safety

13
 r Instrument
Disconnect
Panels and
Signal Ground
rAir-conditioning Wiring
Rudder
Actuators1

Terminals
-Controls,
Circuit
Breakers, and
Instruments

Forward Cargo
Equipment Door Packs IAPUI
LA^ Gargo
Bay
Access Door
Forward Door
Avionics/ Electronics
Bay Access

Cargo Door Aft ElectricaVAvionics

Mid ElectricaVAvionics
Environmental Control
Ground System
Power Cargo Dov-
Connector 7

Avionics/ \ \ W
ngi=i

Rear Spar
Wiring
Electronic Engine Control
Engine Wiring’
Disconnect Panel
400-Hz Generator
\ \> \
Static
Dischargers

Figure 2.1-1 Present-Day Aircraft Systems

14
 Line Replaceable Units

Circuits

Figure 2.1-2 Avionics Bays

Elevator
rGeneral /;^c”;l Rudder

Figure 2.1-3 Wiring

or Case Ground

Channel

Figure 2.1-4 Main Bay Aluminum Structure

15
Power Supply
Separated,
Filtered,

Clock, and
Logic Circuitry
Figure 2.7-5 Structure Return

Lconnector
LDigital Data,
Clock, and
Circuitry Figure 2.7-6lnduced Noise

16
 Clock, and
Logic
Circuitry

-
Figure 2.1 7 Noise Voltages

I Graphite-Epoxy I
Ailerons Rudder

Landing Gear Doors

Figure 2.1-8 Nonmetallic Interfaces

17
and passenger comfort). Redundancy of avionics functions and components has become a de
facto standard. Avionics equipment in today’s aircraft (1986) strongly contribute to the desired
levels of performance and safe flight through separation and duality (figure 2.1-9). Any one
single part or unit in a fully operational and functioning aircraft is not vital and crucial to
continued flight. Triple redundant flight control computers and data buses, for instance, prac-
tically guarantee continuous operation and provide a confident reliance on the automatic pilot
system (figure 2.1-10). Electromagnetic compatibility is important and must be “designed in”
to be cost effective or the avionic equipment will not work, but electromagnetic compatibility
has not been critical to aircraft safety.

Engine monitors or sensors are becoming critical, especially on the new electronic engine
controls (figure 2.1-11). Left engine circuits are separated from the right for safety. Selected
circuits on each engine are separated from each other. Oil pressure transducers, engine tem-
perature thermocouples, exhaust gas temperatures (EGT), and speed sensors (Nl, N2) provide
information on performance and operational boundaries and status. Knowledge of the status
of hydraulics, oil, and fuel systems helps avert critical situations. Throttle lever angle position
must be known, and of course, fire detection is mandatory. Electromagnetic interference must
be designed out of these circuits early in any program.

Communication receivers and transmitters are the key in today’s flight schedules and goals of
smooth flight and fuel economy (figure 2.1-12). Noise must be at a minimum to keep from
degrading receiver thresholds. Broadband noise will reduce communication range. Narrow-
band noise will induce unwanted tones. The flight crew does not want to hear static, 400-Hz
hum, or popping, even though this electromagnetic compatibility problem may only be a
nuisance.

Automatic controls reduce pilot workload and assist in long flights and optimum flight pro-
files (figure 2.1-10). We still see the old-fashioned compass installed in the instrument panel on
the flight deck, but the “horizontal situation indicator” is now a cathode ray tube (which, by
the way, is very susceptible to 400-Hz magnetic fields) and is designated as the electronic
horizontal situation indicator (EHSI). There are two EHSIs to rely on besides the old-fashioned
backup compass (figure 2.1-13). Future aircraft will see flat panel displays that must be pro-
tected from radio frequencies and transients that induce “snow,” “banding,” “lines,” or “rip-
ple” on the screen.

Today’s professional pilot “flys” the plane with the steering column having steel cable strung
from the column to hydraulic actuators which then amplify the force and operate control
surfaces (figure 2.1-14). The engine throttle is operated by a steel cable. A steel cable does not
recognize electromagnetic interference.

Navigation equipment with ground systems that locate and track have grown more and more
sophisticated, accurate, and reliable (figure 2.1-15). Specifications and requirements have
been developed over the years (table 2.1-1). VHF and HF communications are used over land
and sea, all along the airways, and in high-volume areas (figure 2.1-16). Communication avi-
onic units are standalone components that can be individually replaced in the electronic
equipment bay or on the flight deck (figure 2.1-16). Because of the excellent flexibility of unit
replacement, ease of maintenance and substantially lower unit costs, there has been little or
no historical incentive for large-scale integration of functions on present day airplanes (figure
2.1-17). Most equipment today is basically digital, but some is still analog (figure 2.1-18).
Future aircraft will probably see almost total use of digital circuitry.

18
 Lateral Pitch, Yaw- Autopilot Servos

Left- Central Control Actuators

Ft
-Spoilers

-Ailerons

Left and Right- Elevators -Left and Right -Elevators

-Rudder

E -Feel

-Stab

-Yaw
Units

Trim

Dampers

-Right -Thrust Reverser

-Electronic .Engine Control

Figure 2.1-9 Separation Example

Integrated Control Panel

- / //r
I Rudder
1 Autoland Status
I Annunciator
I

T
fl-p;:;;
I
I----- j
I -1 1
Director

I 1 Indicator u FI:, Flap

/Outboard Flap

rfl
f f . n

YY I +l

Servos w
1
Aileron Rudder
Servos

Figure 2.1- 10 Flight Control Autopilot Redundancy

19
 Figure 2.1- 11 Electronic Engine Control

LOW
RANGE
RADIO
ALTIMETER

TRANSMllTER . HF . VHF COMM

500W
D C A V
PEAK
rmm
POWER

ADF GLIDE SLOP ATC

, 25pV/M 75 VORILOC
0.19 1.75 329 335 960 1215 4.3 9.3
2
2 30 1
GHz
RECEIVER lo8 118 136
THRESHOLD
MHz

-Localizer HF Transmit and Receive 7/97

Weather ADF
Radar SenselLoop

DME Beacon
ATC LRRA-TX
L G l i d e Slope LRRA-RX

Figure 2.1- 12 Tansmitters-Receivers

20
 Triple Force r P i l o t ’ s Wheel

-Copilot’s Wheel

TransducersJ ‘\-- \

See “Fly-by-Wire Aircraft”

Figure 2.2-2
Data Bus Architecture

L Aileron Power Control

Unit

Figure 2.1- 14 Roll Control System

21
r t
VORl
VORl 4 : r--
'
7

DME ILS + ILS

FMC +---A
Controls MKR -T-+
--I- I r Controls
1

I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
Controls ----
$---+ Radio Nav Output Buses
W Tune Bus

Figure 2.1- 15 Navigation

Technical
Navigation Federal Aviation Standard Advisory Number
Equipment Regulation Order Circular Required
(FAR) CrSO)

VOR 121.349a,e C40a 90-45A

DME 121.349c C66a 90-45A
LOCIGS 121.349a C34b 120-28A
C36b 120-29
MB 121.349a c35c -
ADF 121.349b C41b 20-63
INSIISS 121.355 - 25-4
121, App. G 121-13
RNAV - - 90-45A
Omega - - 120-31

Table 2.1-1 Navigation €quipment Documentation

22
VHF
Blade
Antenna

ARINC I
Communications I
and Reporting ,J
System (ACARS) Service
Management lnterphone
Unit

Figure 2.1- 16 Communication

23
 1I Terminal

ElectricallElectronic
Equipment Cooling System
1 Removal and Repair-
Direct Maintenance Cost
7

Power Supply
Separated, Filtered,

Polyurethane Conforma From 5% to 100%)

Typical
Removable
Avionics Mounted
~ata* Connector Circuit
Equipment Clock, and
Logic Cards
Circuitry

Figure 2.1- 1 7 Line Replaceable Unit

24
r
Guidance Flight Control Electronics Navigation
1

Flight Control
Computer Control Panel
Mode Symbol
Panel

ElCAS
Computer

Communications

Flight
Management

Computer

Warning
Electronics
Technology Code
1-1 Digital

Analog I
r--
I---&
7 Provisions
Hybrid

Figure 2.1- 18 Flight Management Systems

Aircrafk utilities, of course, are basic to commercial transport operation. Fluorescent lights in
the cabin are noisy. Pressurization controls, cooling fans, and window heaters contribute to
aircraft magnetic fields. Cargo handling and windshield wiper motors, fans, and galley
heaters inflict broadband noise on digital and analog circuits. Future systems may have pulse
width modulated voltages that will contribute to noise.

Today’s interface circuits span the systems from engine instrumentation to navigation to
flight control to utilities, but electromagnetic compatibility engineers do not deal with flight
systems. They deal with circuit types, and basically those types can be counted on your fin-
gers. The types can be boiled down to digital data, radio frequency signals, analog signals,
discrete state changes, and 400-Hz115V or 28V-dc power and in the future pulsed dc power.

If one were to look at the specific types of interconnecting circuits, here are some examples of
the electricallelectronic characteristics and parameters:

25
 EXAMPLES
CIRCUIT LEVEL RATEFREQUENCY THRESHOLD

1) Digital data: +5v 12 kH2 2.5V

(ARINC 429 transmitterlreceivers: information transfer, altitude, airspeed, direction,

positions.)

2) Pulse circuits: +50V pulse 1PPS mV

(Fuel flow; engine speed)

3) “Discrete” +30V Event ON/OFF 1ov

(Status: Pumps, valves, relays, heaters)

4) Analog ov to 1ov Continuous mV

(Position indicators)

5) Power 28V dc (sw. reg. 10 to 100 kHd

115V ac 400 H z and harmonics

(Avionics, pumps, lights, motors, generator feeders.)

6) RF Volts Variable PV

The electromagnetic compatibility engineer helps to simplify and forge the layout of the
equipment and routing of the wires (figure 2.1-19). He pays particular attention to radiated
emission from wiring and radio frequency fields imposed on wiring (figure 2.1-20). Equipment
location has been settled usually in the past by greater attention to and emphasis on tempera-
ture characteristics, size, separation, accessibility, and center of gravity factors rather than
electromagnetic compatibility. And, rightly so. Wiring, wire clamps, shield ties to structure,
and routing of wire bundle installations have been shaped by the space available, structure
geometry, and have been installed as a n “add-on” while all the time being given the appella-
tion of weight penalty. Conduit or metallic ground planes have not been needed. Shielding
could be added any time.

We and our predecessors seldom created and documented substantive and comprehensive
input/output interface circuit drawings to provide a n analysis on a systematic basis of the
noise sources and the major avenues of coupling. Electromagnetic interference sometimes has
been most elusive and difficult to analyze, model, and predict.

Avionic equipment units have been designed and tested to industry electromagnetic compati-
bility specifications and then, along with their interconnecting wiring, installed directly in
the aircraft. They almost always perform properly. This method has been cost effective and not
at odds with safety. Fixes to equipment or the airplane sometimes can be made fairly easily
and inexpensively, although often done in a hurry and with the ever-present specter of the
very expensive “retrofit.”

As we look back, it is recognized that the electromagnetic compatibility effort has been reac-
tionary, not anticipatory.
26
27
 Radiated Emission From
Wiring to HF Receiver

HF Transmitted

Figure 2.1-20 Radiated Emission

2.2 FUTURE AIRCRAFT

Turn now and look ahead to a hypothetical future aircraft.

A view of a system avionic architecture might focus on the technologies of digital buses,
electric actuators, and composite structural materials as having the greatest interest for the
electromagnetic compatibility engineer or airworthiness specialist (figure 2.2-1).A system of
communication and control designed around fly-by-wire digital data buses and electric actua-
tors will have an impact on analysis tasks; that is, greater effort will be needed to assure
absence of electromagnetic interference in the data bus and control of electromagnetic inter-
ference from the actuators and pulsed dc.

Connection of autonomous electronics through a multiple access two-way data bus will remove
dependance on a centralized controlling processor (figure 2.2-2).

There will be a number of new aircraft technologies that will moderate problems but will
mean new areas of expertise and study:
1) All-electric airplane (electric actuators), pulsed dc.
2) Autonomous, multiple-access data bus with decentralized computers (dual redundant)
3) Self-diagnostics, self-test, error control, and record keeping
4) Electronic keyboard actuation of power and avionics
5) Side-stick controllers
6) Single point of entry program loading
7) Flat panel and head up displays
8) Voice control

28
 Structural Materials
Active Controls
Cockpit Displays
\ I / Advanced Engine Controls
Digital Data Busses

Laminar Flow Electric Actuators

Aircraft
Systems

Air Traffic Control Economic Trends

Certification Criteria / '
Airline Requirements

Figure 2.2-1 EMC and Aircraft Systems Development

Bus
TA
Terminal
n

Interface

pq
Processor

Wire, or Both (Example)

v
Figure 2.2-2 Data Bus Architecture

29
What will be the impact of these systems on electromagnetic compatibility? More inductive
switching transient control? Electrostatic transient control? Better high-energy radio fre-
quency fields rejection and control?

Flat panel displays collocated with their own microprocessor avionics on the flight deck, de-
pending on design, will mean less wiring and fewer coupling paths, less susceptibility, less
electromagnetic radiation and electromagnetic interference. An improved flight management
system will integrate navigation, communication, guidance, and energy management. More-
over, there will be expanded management capability of all of the systems (figure 2.2-3).

Figure 2.2-3 Line-of-Sight Display and Voice Control

Multifunction keyboards will permit speed and flexibility and maximum accessibility of op-
tions and data selection initiated by voice (figure 2.24). Side-stick controllers, electronic throt-
tle, and flap control will not only facilitate operation and open up the instrument panel
viewing area, but also will demand guarantees of safe operation and freedom from noise. Head
up displays and electronically controlled relays and actuators will help clear and simplify
instrumentation and add more power and versatility to aircraft control on the flight deck.

One of the key elements in a future aircraft is the data bus, where wire and weight savings
will be dramatic. The number of interface circuits will decrease (figure 2.2-5). Research on
digital buses will be required to better define susceptibilities to high-energy radio frequencies
and transients. It is expected that some form of multiple access bus will be available for future
aircraft (figure 2.2-6). Commercial transport planes are now using the ARINC 429 bus, a 12-
kHz or 100-kHz, unidirectional, twisted pair shielded bus that operates from each transmitter
to multiple receivers with a binary-coded decimal format. The military bus is MIL-STD-1553:
a 1 - M E , bidirectional, twisted pair shielded, transformer-isolated bus totally run from a cen-
tralized 1553 bus controller with a serial, Manchester II, bi-phase format. (See Section 8.0,
Bibliography, ARINC 429 and MIL STD 1553 bus system.) New systems are being developed
to provide multiple access and decentralized processing. One such is called DATAC, a 1-MHz,
bidirectional, twisted pair or fiber-optic bus with controlled specifications of protocol to facili-
tate transmission and reception.

30
 I- Pilot
Flight
Controls
Pulse
Width
Modulated Drive
Controllers and
Electric Actuators

Pitch Gyros
Processor
Group -
Wing
Motion

-
Sensor

Motion
I AutoI and

n Air Data
Sensors L
I I
Processor
Group

Flight

t-
Surface Guidance
Position
Sensors Group
I
c Sensor
Altimeter Management
Bus A I
Bus C Group

i
I
Lo-UHoIII
Shaker
Trans- Actuator
ponder Bus D

Multifunction
I and Navigation
I Status Panel I
~~~~~~

(Keyboard Control) Major Control Panels

Figure 2.2-4 Hypothetical Architecture

31
 1

Percent

Q Present Day
Future Digital
Data Bus

U
Wire Connectors Wire Wire Wire
Bundles Segments Length Weight

Figure 2.2-5 Data Bus Comparison

(a) ARlNC 429

Alternate
Controller
f,
Controller Alternate
Controller

(b) MIL-STD-15538
? 0 Protocol Logic
u1 u2 u3 Transmitter
0Receiver

(c) DATAC System

Figure 2.2-6 Digital Data Buses

32
Possibly one of the most revolutionary changes to come about for electromagnetic compatibil-
ity will be the increased introduction of self-test and self-diagnostic capabilities in avionics
allowing real-time readout or a history of equipment susceptibilities to noise (figure 2.2-7).
Microprocessor evolution is speeding the development of these systems, and dramatic changes
will occur in the immediate future (figure 2.2-8 and figure 2.2-9).

Hydraulic actuators powering control surfaces and other aircraft items such as landing gears
and doors may be replaced by all-electric actuators now being developed. The actuator control-
lers contain “pulse width modulated” signals driving stepper motors. They are relatively
high-voltage devices, are noisy, and the pulses need to be contained.

New composite and metallic alloy structural materials will mean greater efforts in the evalua-
tion of the cornerstones of electromagnetic compatibility-the grounding and bonding designs
that maintain current paths and stable electrical references (figure 2.2-10).

Many existing systems are being advanced and improved (table 2.2-1 and figure 2.2-11).

The air traffic control radar beacon system (ATCRBS)operation (based on a ground interroga-
tion of a n airplane transponder to assess flight identity, altitude, range, and azimuth) is being
upgraded with a new beacon mode, called Mode-S, which is a two-way digital link, to selec-
tively address each aircraft. Surveillance en route and at terminals during approach starts at
about 6000 ft (1830m) above ground level.

The airport surface detection system (ASDS), a primary radar system, is being implemented to
transmit a pictorial presentation of the terminal surface area in order to expedite traffic.

0
FAULT FUNCT NO.
DOWN TEST ONOFF DATA TEST SKID
000000
“INTEGRATED MAINTENANCE”

-
I

FLIGHT FLIGHT THRUST

MANAGEMENT CONTROL MANAGEMENT
COMPUTERS COMPUTERS COMPUTERS

Figure 2.2-7 Performance and Status Monitors

33
 A/D Converters
Processors
0
Invention 0 Intel 8086

of the VLSl@ 0 256K Memories

Transistor 28000 Microprocessor

I LSI Custom Gate Arrays
64K RAMS/ROMS
0 Hybrid Chip Assemblies

Vacuu Transistors
I I
1 1 I I I I I

1920 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 2000
Figure 2.2-8 Microprocessor Evolution

Electric Stick Controllers '

voice input m m
Digital Data Bus
Automatic Flight ManagemeAt
--
Flat Panel d i s p l a y s A
I

Workload

1
1900 1950 2000

Figure 2.2-9 Avionics Technology Progress

34
 Present Day Hypothetical
1990-2000Subsonic Airplane

Titanium
Figure 2.2-10 Materials Distribution

i
ATC Subsystem 1980 85 90 95 2000
Navigation
Basic VOR, DME, NDB
Alternate or Special Application
Loran-C m = , I - I I D I I - - I - - m
Omega D D m I r - r e r l r I , D I
GPS I I - - D m = I
INS
Landing Aids
ILS
* MLS I=- I

Communications
Mode-S Data Link

-
---I
Very High Frequency
High Frequency
SATCOM
Separation Assurance
TCAS
I

-I
- I

I
I
ID I

I-
I
I

Data Acquisition
ATCRBS I
Mode-S =I I

Figure 2.2-1 1 1990s ATC Implementation

35
 ~ ~~

SYSTEM A PPLICAT I0N AVION ICS

DATA ACQUISITION
ATCRBS WITH Mode-S-Equipped Transponder Required Mode-S Transponder
MODE-S on Air Carrier Aircraft
SEPARATION
ASSURANCE
TCAS Required for All Air Carriers Interrogator, Controls, and
Displays
COMMUNICATIONS
VHFVOICE Most US. Domestic and Foreign ATC VHF Transceiver
Operations
MODE-S D/L High-Density US. Airspace Mode-S Data Link Modem and
I/O Devices
HFSSB Overocean and Lesser Developed Overland HF SSB Transceiver
Air Routes
SATCOM Overocean Voice and Data Data Unit and RF Unit
n NAVIGATION AIDS
VOR Required for Short-Range Navigation Receiver
DME Required for Short-Range Navigation Interrogator
NDB Needed for Navigation and Approach n Automatic Direction Finder
Guidance in Some Areas
INS Used for Long-Range Navigation
Independently or With Other Systems
(e.g., for Position Fixing)
OMEGA Used for Long-Range Navigation
Independently or To Position-Fix INS One or More Types Needed for
in Either VLF or Omega Modes Long-Range Navigation; INS
GPS May Find use for Either Short- or Installation Must Be at
Long-Range Navigation or To Least a Dual System
Position-Fix INS
B LANDING AIDS
ILS Required Until 1995 or Until All B ILS Localizer, Glideslope, and
Destination Runways Have MLS Marker Beacon Receivers
MLS Required After 1995 but Needed Before MLS Receiver
To Obtain Improved Landing Guidance
Available at Runways Where Implemented

Table 2.2- 1 1990’s ATC Implementation

36
The instrument landing system a s ) consists of a 108- to 112-MHz localizer for horizontal, a
328- to 335-MHz glide slope for vertical, and two 75-MHz marker beacons for distance to
provide position starting at 33 km from the runway (18 nmi). The system is used extensively
and will be augmented with a new microwave landing system (MLS)to provide landing in zero
visibility utilizing a ground-transmitted signal to the aircraft to establish elevation, azimuth,
and distance and is now collocated with the ILS until replacing it.

Navigation systems will expand in extent and capability. The traffic alert and collision avoid-
ance system CTCAS) requires a transponder trace, and interrogator to detect, track, and com-
pute aircraft flightpath projections and initiate selected levels of warning and avoidance
maneuver advisories.

The very high frequency omnidirectional range NOR) establishes a magnetic bearing, is a
short-range aid, and is generally collocated with a distance measuring equipment (DME) sta-
tion, which provides for more precise distance measurement from the VOR.

The automatic direction finder (ADF) uses nondirectional beacons (200 to 415 kHz)to provide
a bearing ( k 3 deg) at a range of 18 to 650 km (10 to 350 nmi).

Loran-C covers about 1850 km (1000 nmi) with pulses at 100 Hz with a positioning accuracy of
0.46 km (0.25 nmi), repeatable to 18m to 90m (60 to 300 R)and is operated by the Coast Guard
along the contiguous U.S.and Alaska, but is presently not being installed by scheduled air
carriers.

Many of these systems will be supported or replaced by the global positioning system (GPS)
which in future years will provide worldwide, accurate, all-weather positioning.

Communication systems will see unparalleled improvement in reliability and flexibility.

Very high frequency (VHF) voice communication, the continental U.S.air traffic control sys-
tem to airport towers and control centers, operates between 116 and 136 MHz with projected
bandwidth spacing of 25 lrHz at a receiver sensitivity of around a microvolt.

High-frequency (HF)voice communication, for use over water, operates at 2 to 30 MHz with a
receiver threshold of about 2pV and transmitter output of possibly 400W peak effective power.

2.3 CRITICALITIES

2.3.1 Measures and Definitions

By any measure, airplanes are safe. Airplane avionics are a part of that safety picture. And
electromagnetic compatibility is a part of the proper operation of avionics.

Although safety records have been built and established over the years, the criticality of
avionics and their interconnecting wiring is not an unchanging situation. Of course, mathe-
matically finite possibilities of avionics performance errors or malfunctions always exist, and
it almost goes without saying that absolute, definitive resolution of the exact probabilities and
reliability of critical circuits is elusive.

37
“The simultaneous failure of two reliable independent systems, each of which has dual redun-
dancy,” states FAA Advisory Circular AC No:25.1309-1, “is expected to be extremely improba-
ble.” But still, the performance of critical avionics equipment cannot be allowed to be affected
by the noise in the airplane.

Critical circuits need evaluation. Evaluation is needed on nonessential systems for their affect
on critical circuits. Flight crews must not be given misleading information. Noise effects can
be barred with shielding, rejected by balanced circuits, diverted and contained with filtering,
or neutralized by software.

‘Igble 2.3-1itemizes some equipment criticality categories and definitions, and Figure 2.3-1
charts a general relationship of probability and consequence.

Cat A Critical Prevent safe Extremely improbable 10-9

flight (per 1 hr)
B Essential Impaired ability Improbable 1 0 - ~to 1 0 - ~
to cope
C Nonessential No significant Maintenance repair
degradation cost limits

Eble 2.3-1 Categories of Criticality

Toward the end of a n airplane program, malfunctions or upsets can practically be brought to
zero by repeated subsystem testing by the airframe manufacturer in conjunction with the
avionics manufacturer of, first, prototypes, then engineering models, and finally production
units. The avionics operation in a simulated noisy environment will be understood, and veri-
fied, and the data and experience will help contribute to aircraft validation (figure 2.3-2).

2.3.2 Critical Equipment

What makes equipment critical? What conditions influence criticalities? Here are some defin-
ing generalities:

Function:
Does the unit support safety of flight or is it for convenience, comfort, work relief, or
economy?
Is the unit employed to maintain flight, or is it needed to proceed to the nearest airport,
or to continue to destination?

Redundancy:
Is the unit triple or quadruple redundant?
If the first unit fails and the second unit fails, can loss of aircraft be averted?

38
 h
I

II
I t
I

Probability
t
1aEin;a- .
105

i
t --
.nce
Litpit
I
10’ I
I
I II I I 1 1 I I I 1

Consequence

Figure 2.3-1 Probability krsus Consequence

Engineerina Evaluation and

Figure 2.3-2 Three-Stage Subsystem Testing

39
History:
What is the history, condition, and age of the unit or the aircraft?
Are all units operating at flight dispatch?

Flight conditions:
Is criticality based on phase of flight: takeoff, climbout, cruise, landing?
Is criticality based on type of flight: deficient or lack of navigation facilities, instrument
flight, heavy weather, long flight, over water, nighttime operation?
Is flight safety dependent on automated electronic controls, instruments and sensors?

What circuits are classified as critical? Certain circuits or functions must be extracted and
given special attention for electromagnetic compatibility. Circuits that might be considered
include these illustrative examples:
Flight control/flight management: control surface actuators, displacement transducers,
servo valves, position indicators, switches/valves; electric controllers/actuators; negative
stability controllers; augmentation controllers; air data, attitude, altitude, airspeed, and
situation indicators, displays, control panels and their backups; automated landing
system
Navigatiodcommunication: VHF transceivers, voice recorder, tape recorder, ADF, radio
altimeter, instrument landing system, marker beacon
Power: standby power, instrument lights, standby instruments
Advisory flight instrumentation: actuators, position indicators, displays, test circuits,
pressure, temperature, quantities
Fire detection systems
Landing gear: antiskid control
Engine: controller actuators, computers, displays, temperatures, speeds, pressures, quan-
tities, restartlshutdown, thrust reversers

Figure 2.3-3 delineates a block diagram of some hypothetical categories of future aircraft
systems.

2.4 PACKAGING AND ARCHITECTURE

The aircraft is an electrical/electronic package. Right from the start, the aircraft packaging
design must include a layout and topology that optimizes electromagnetic compatibility. Here
are the dominant EMC desired designs:
1) Major subsystems are grouped together for an inline equipment design, input to output,
to draw out the shortest possible wire bundle routing.
2) Major incompatible wiring groups are separated: power feeders from electronics; analog
(with single point ground) from digital; high voltagehigh frequency from digital; low-
level sensitive from power.
3) The aircraft has a designed system-level shielding barrier combined with a designed,
controlled, equipotential ground plane system.

40
 1 - 1...Wing ...

............
...
-:-:.Motion !:!:!

+ ppf$rm1
:.:.:Sensor:::::
............
.............
...........................
...........................
........ ........:.:.:.

I-/-
...........
::;&i&Ce

.:.:
.::::
:.:-Position ::f:
.............
Sensors::::
............
...............
...
...
.:.:.
.. Guidance :I::.
:.:.: Processor::::
...............
.......
I
i
I
I
#
D
I
I
O
-
II O
IO~
I
............
............
!
i ............
c Sensor I ............
Bus A Management Cooo-ooo-----
Processor ............
ym{-yzJk
1 .
.............
............
.............
............
.............
.............
............
.............
............
Systems
Bus c Group
I
I
I
i
I
............
............
.....

............ ~00110~0091

Pneumatic I
Sensors I
I
I
I ............

Trans-
‘1 Controller
Actuator
............
............
ponder Bus D

.......

Maior
Flight Deck I Actuator I
------ L-----
Displays Crucial

i t
‘ I
I i n Workload Relief

I i
I I
I I
~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - - -

(Keyboard Control) Major Control Panels

Figure 2.3-3 Projected Criticalities

41
4) Every interface circuit, electronics and power, is filtered and protected. Controlled trans-
mission line design techniques are employed for susceptible and digital interface circuits.
5) Every installed unit of equipment meets the EMC qualification test requirements.

All of these designs and technologies need early conceptual consideration, planning, and lay-
out. A mockup is invaluable. Inline design is the best. Locate equipment to minimize wiring
lengths. Electromagnetic coupling increases with length. Make wire connections short. It’s
good for weight. It’s excellent for electromagnetic compatibility.

Here is a more detailed checklist.

Grounding:
Ground connections cleaned and burnished, no paint, must verify
Ground wires evaluated for resonance, capacity, and continuity
Avionics case grounded with a low resistance (and verified)
Grounding paths and references designated on drawing
Trays, conduit, metal liners, foils designed for return currents
Graphite-epoxy not used as structure return
Analog circuits are single point grounded or isolation provided
Each avionic unit returdground identified
Engine circuit returdground analyzed for wire length and impedance

Bonding:
Structure electrically bonded and aperture bonds contirmed
Electrostatic conductive paints applied to external dielectric or nonconductive surfaces
Equipment bonding to structure verified
All isolated metal objects bonded

Shielding:
360 deg, peripheral shield connections used
Backshell continuity defined and checked
All circuits evaluated for shielding
All low-level, sensitive circuits shielded
Shield noise not carried inside case confirmed

Wiring:
Landing gear wiring installed in conduit and flexible overbraid
No wiring routed under unshielded fairings
Wiring installed close to structure
Shielded, balanced, isolated interface circuits employed

42
 Power feeders given a power line and a wire return
Signal lines given a signal line and a wire return
Twisted pair used for audio circuits
Oscillator harmonic frequencies emanating from clocks, switching regulators, pulse
width modulators, and digital data lines shielded. Conducted and radiated emissions,
close to receivers, may need to be controlled below DO-160limits

Packaginghnstallation:
Test data dug out to verlfy equipment complies with specification
Equipment tested to up-to-date requirements
Transformers separated from CRTs and audio circuits
Environmental control, flight controVelectric actuators, flight management, radio trans-
mitters and receivers, power, and engine control systems unearthed, defined, grouped,
and aligned
Mockup constructed to settle on equipment topology
Functional or subsystem grouping provided for environmental control electronics, switch-
ing units, valves, fans; flight control, electric controllers located next t o stepper motors;
air data, caution advisory computers next to their transducers; radio Erequency units,
power supply, electronics, amplifier, antennas; heavy power generators, converter regula-
tors, transformer rectifiers, switching contactors, power switching unit installed together,
and separated from avionics; power “single point grounds” positioned next to power regu-
lator or distribution unit; power switching unit centrally located; dedicated avionic power
supplies installed next to the unit they supply; electronic engine controllers positioned to
shorten and minimize wiring to engine sensors and controls
All circuits evaluated for filtering
Equipment input and output wiring not doubled back upon itself
All circuits evaluated for categories and separation

These are not all the answers but they will help.

2.5 Issues

2.5.1 An Early Start

The whole EMC scenario rises up and needs resolution at the concept of the program. This is
an issue. The scope and depth are resolved first-is it a proposal? - proof of concept? - or full
production program? What are the funding boundaries?

Environmental assessment quickly follows, all of the environment inside and outside of the
airplane. This is an issue.

43
Early in the program, light must be shed on the “tailored” design requirements or waivers for
subcontractors. New systems demand definition. Policy and schedule come into focus in a brief
EMC plan. These are large tasks and they are all at issue. Bringing two or three people on
board early is an added expense. It seems unnecessary. Electromagnetic compatibility design
does not start at the design stage, it starts at the concept stage.

2.5.2 Design

2.5.2.1 Shielding

Shielding is one of the best ways, the most all-around effective ways to protect a circuit.
Shielding diverts almost all of the energies of noise. Shielding stops transients as well as radio
frequencies. It protects against electric fields. It helps t o maintain controlled stripline impe-
dance. It guards against arcing and sparking. But, it adds weight to the aircraft, requires
maintenance, and costs more. Shields require shield ties-diffkult to install, particularly for
panel-mounted equipment. With adequate modeling and design effort, shielding can be judi-
ciously applied.

2.5.2.2 Power and Signal Returns and Wire Grounds

Sometimes a wire is good, sometimes bad. Many of today’s circuits or case housings are refer-
enced to structure ground with a wire, which may resonate. Many of the interface circuits
between equipment do not have a wire return, which will open the circuit up to noise. Both of
these practices are detrimental to EMC but they save on weight. Wiring is good as a signal
return and bad as a circuit reference.

2.5.2.3 Dielectrics

By specification, wiring and connector insulations have dielectric withstand strengths at sea
level of 1500V,400-Hzsteady state. That 1500V,weakens as one goes up in altitude. It can be
down around 300V,its lowest point, at an altitude of 250,000 ft. In the future, as power line
voltages rise and aircraft altitudes increase, dielectric strengths and corona will become more
of a concern.

2.5.3 Environment and Test

2.5.3.1 High-Energy Radio Frequency Fields

Magnitude, pattern, frequency, polarization, modulation, and geographical location of high-

energy radio frequency and radar transmitters are needed. To evaluate aircraft circuit immu-
nity, a systems approach must be implemented to study shielding, induced voltages, circuit
protection, and software correction techniques. An industry susceptibility test specification is
needed. In areas such as this, compliance to DO-160 may not guarantee system-level
compatibility. Efforts are underway to provide an update of high-energy radio frequency field
environments and protection techniques. (See Section 8.0, Bibliography, ECAC study on Elec-
tromagnetic Environment.)

44
2.5.3.2 Fields From 400 Hz and Transients

Some say that the power system 400-Hzis the most troublesome electromagnetic environment
on the aircraft causing 50% or more of the shortcomings in EMC quality. Audio 400-Hz“hum”
derives from magnetic (“H”) field. Electric (“E”) fields can trigger a comparator circuit that
has high-input impedance, and it’s well known that powerline transients cause logic upset
resulting in lockup or even equipment shutdown until the flaws are found and rooted out.
Through better definition, analysis, and modeling techniques, avionics designers must be
made aware that their equipment is operating in this environment. Higher design and test
levels are appropriate in some instances coupled with more attention to finding interface
circuit thresholds during test. It is controversial.

2.5.3.3 Test Conditions

In the laboratory during development or qualification testing, it is expensive, difficult, and

unmeaningful to strive to recreate actual aircraft installation or production configurations.
There are wire lengths, resonant conditions, and test coupling conditions that may not ade-
quately simulate the aircraft and, because of this test deficiency, may ultimately lead to an
upset occurring on the aircraft. Possibly one answer is to verify that test levels are high
enough with an adequate safety margin. Subsystem tests offer information on EMI character-
istics to help moderate this dilemma. Aircraft tests authenticate the final EMC design.

2.5.3.4 Emission Variances

Today’s conducted and radiated emission limits are restrictive under some conditions (see
Appendix B). Computers, with digital clocks and switching regulators, sometimes emit har-
monics in the HF megahertz region that defy total containment and consequently emissions
may be a few dF3 above limits. Cases exist where it is uneconomical and unnecessary to go to
extraordinary efforts to filter those emissions if it can be shown that they will not in any way
radiate to local receiving antennas. Infringements may be approved and deviations granted
without adverse effects on neighboring circuits. The present radiated emission limit in the
VHF range is not too restrictive and, in fact, could be tightened (lowered). Deviations should
almost never be granted for susceptibility tests. It is necessary to apply discretion.

2.5.3.5 Subsystem Testing

Subsystem testing is different in intent from equipment qualification testing. Subsystem test-
ing, usually held at the airframe manufacturer’s facility with support from the avionics sup-
plier, provides insight into the susceptibility thresholds and emission levels while simulating
noise environments of the airplane.

The tests are for engineering evaluation and they provide significant information on computer
processing performance and interface data quality. Test software exercises the processing func-
tions and the interfaces between avionics units, and further, it monitors processing, memory,
and transmissions of data for any abnormal conditions. Error counters or fault logging fea-
tures examine operation in real time and provide capability for hard copy printout. Formal
pass or fail standards for susceptibility and emission do not apply. Completion of the specific
test procedures and the investigation is the gage for determining success.

45
The features are that many interface circuits are per manufacturer’s configuration, software
is up to date, and observation is real time. At this stage of the program, the equipment
avionics engineer is available to provide rapid evaluations and judgments. Re-evaluation and
decisions on rework or test changes are easy and flexible. Often these tests can be performed
on a “noninterference” basis using informal procedures. They establish standards for the
airplane test. Costs are low.

2.5.3.6 Aircraft Testing

Aircraft testing is the final authentic proof. It offers first hand “real-world” validation. Wir-
ing, equipment, and installations are the final design. It is expensive, however. It is expensive
beginning with the test procedure (step-by-step development and approvals), then the aircraft
test itself (a labor intensive operation compounded on top of a costly unit of equipment), then
continuing with the formal documentation of unplanned events during the test, and ulti-
mately ending with a n elaborate final report.

2.6 VARIANCES IN ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY

2.6.1 Diagnostics and Troubleshooting

Flight Test phoned Project. Project called Flight Deck instrumentation staff. Then staff con-
tacted the electromagnetic compatibility engineers.

A new aircraft on the flight line had a discrepancy in the left engine fuel flow reading. The
fuel flow digital readout on the display screen of the criticality advisory system (CAS) was
variable and erratic whenever the 400-Hzpower to the engine Mach probe heater was ener-
gized. What was happening and what was the cause? A work authorization was quickly ap-
proved; time on the airplane scheduled; and laboratory test support called in.

On the airplane in cramped quarters next to the electronics bay, investigators used an oscillo-
scope to troubleshoot the problem on the circuits running from the fuel flow meter on the left
wing engine to the CAS computer located in the electronics bay. Connectors were hard to
reach and remove with care. Knuckles got scraped. Equipment was diffcult to move. Engine
run time was expensive. As a part of the investigation, the left engine wire bundle was discon-
nected from the left CAS computer and reconnected to the right CAS computer to see if the
problem would “follow” the bundle. It did, and that showed that the CAS computer itself was
not totally at fault and that 400-Hz,115V power in a wing wire bundle was being coupled to
the fuel flow circuit.

The 400-Hz,115V power wire to the mach probe heater, traced out on the wiring diagrams,
starts in the electronics bay and runs out to the engine; but then the 115V heater return wire
is taken from the engine back onto the engine strut; the wire is there connected to structure
with structure being used as return back to the power source in the electronics bay. So the
“high side” of the 115V power wire runs in the same bundle in the leading edge for 100 ft next
to the unshielded, fuel flow circuit. There is 100 ft of “electric field” capacitive coupling.

On the other hand, the fuel flow circuit is three wire balanced, has the meter wires isolated on
the engine, and has a high-resistance input to a n operational amplifier in the CAS computer
protected at the input by 5 kQ resistors and diodes to ground. The two, 350-mV pulses gener-
ated by the fuel flow meter have a working period approximating the period of the 400 cycles
per second. The 115V, 400-Hznoise was induced right on the 350 mV.

46
The fuel flow circuits were rapidly set up and simulated in the laboratory and they malfunc-
tioned under the DO-160power line “electric field” test just as had occurred on the aircraft. It
took only 40V at 10 ft (400Vft),equivalent to 4V at 100 ft, of coupling to cause upset (figure
2.6-1).The test requirement is 120V at 100 ft (12,000Vft). Other DO-160 tests caused no
upset. Once the simulated circuits with the proper pulses had been developed and the thresh-
olds and boundary characteristics of the upset outlined, the test was scheduled, set up, and
run in an avionics laboratory with a production configuration CAS system. With management
approval, communication was established through Project with the subcontractor. He was able
to duplicate the condition.

The long, 100-ftwiring run, all the way from the electronic bay through the wing pressure
seal, then along the wing leading edge to the engine strut and down into the engine, had
provided an extensive opportunity for electric field coupling into the operational amplifier
wiring. What will correct electric field coupling? A low resistance or shield will.

Wire shielding, installed on the airplane fuel flow circuit, provided an excellent barrier
against the electric field and was a quick solution.

The operational amplifier design in the CAS computer, although a balanced circuit, did not
offer proper noise rejection to stop the upset. It turned out that that circuit design was inher-
ently difficult to balance, partly because of resistor mismatch, partly because of capacitor
imbalance, and possibly because of a phase shift occurring in the signal return.

This “variance” from electromagnetic compatibility on the aircraft took months to resolve.
Flight test, project, manufacturing, management, and subcontractors: all were involved. Work
authorizations, reviews, justifications, and documentation were invoked, processed, approved,
and completed. A necessary, but costly, effort.

Induced
Voltage

0.1 ft 10cm 1 ft lm loft 10m 100ft lOOm

Wire Coupling Length

Figure 2.6-7 A Discrepancy

47
2.6.2 Table of Variances

2.6.2.1 Commercial

Diagnostics and troubleshooting of electronics are continuously demanded because of avionic

circuit susceptibility to transients, 400-Hzelectric (“E”) and magnetic (“H”) fields, radio fie-
quencies U3F“FVHF) including clock and switching regulator harmonics, and power quality.
Knowledge of past lessons may help save design and troubleshooting expense (table 2.6.1). The
bottom line is adequacy of specifications. In a b l e 2.6-1, under the DO-160 column, recommen-
dations are made on possible increases in test levels to improve aircraft electromagnetic
compatibility.

2.6.2.2 Air Force

The Air Force has documented troubleshooting experience. “The coupling of fields through the
unintentional antennas formed by aircraft wiring,” Zenter, the author, says, “is the cause of
many interference problems.” (table 2.6.2)

2.6.3 Corrective Action and Modeling

A comprehensive study of troubleshooting is needed before accurate corrections to the aircraft

system specifications or the RTCA DO-160 equipment specification can be recommended. Doc-
umented, statistical groupings of troubleshooting experience concerning historical EM1 char-
acteristics and cost factors do not exist, but one might postulate some possible categories and
hypothetical percentages as shown in the accompanying pie charts (figure 2.6-2).

A study of categories such as these might reveal that analysis and modeling of analog/audio
circuit susceptibility is most beneficial, or possibly better models of aircraft wire coupling
might help, or even modeling and documenting of the most popular fixes.

48
 TABLE 2.6-1
-
VAF YCES I N EWC
EWI SOURCE EPUI PIENT PATH SYnPiuns REIEDY DO-160
:LASSIFICATIOL
~
RECEPTOR -
Static: 1 windshld crptr isch iis c r p t r qnd wndshld add t e s t ant-antenna
2 coverslpan VHF rev I
aud bnd covers rud-audio hur or tones
cab-cabin
3 duct RDF r c v I I
ynd duct cap-caprci t o r
4 ant cover I I I
paint covr crptr-corputer
CRT-cathode ray tube
Sw.trnsnt: 1 powerline mptr IC fel rudl lqnd inc trnsnt del-change or roverent
fis crptr d i s-di senqaqe
1
2 I
lock up caplsof twr dsch-di scharqe
I
3 I
false crd I
'E'-electric f i e l d
eq-equi prent
100Hz'E'f ield, 1 powerline :rptr I
ind- FF shld i n c 'E' FF-fuel flow
2 12 i n d I
ind- 12 I
f i e l d level -
f i1 f i1t er
3 :rptr I
ind-Flqty I
ql-qround loop
4 aud c i r I
3ud I lqnd-single point qround
"'-ragnetit field
IOOHz'H'field: 1 powerline intrphn 11
I
iqnd inc 'H' HUD-head up display
f i e l d level inc-increase
I I I
2 wadset ind-indicator change
IHF r c v intrphn-interphone
3 /ideocoax 1
le1 CRT Ifx iso,lqnd intrpt-interrupt
4 :RT tC
I
IP & sep i s o - i solate
1 I
5 tape head iud It-light
b aud cir 1 I
f i l lsep NZ-engine speed
I I
7 I
IP,sep, lgnd prx-proximity snitch
rad- tr anscei vers
C1 ock hrrncs: 1 WK r d r ILS r c v l I
5eP inc RF rcdrs-recorder s
a
2 portble oreqa rci i n d del: shld 1evel rcv-receiver
r adlrcdrs spd ,tour si rdr-radar

. .
Sw reg hr rncs 1 crptr VHF r c v . aud sep, shld inc RF
RE-radi ated e r i ssi on
sep-separ a t i on
1evel shl d-shi e l d
I sup-suppressi on
HF-VHF freq: 1 VHF t x handset RE f i l ricrphn i n c RF
1 I tf x-transf orrer
2 VHF t x headset tfx is0 level
TP-twisted p a i r
3 HF t x crptr NC cab press f i l l cap
trnsnt-transient
4 ' aud c i r I
aud dub1shld
n tx-transritter
5'
I
i nd I
wc-wire coupling
b HF eq VHF eq I
aud I
wx -wea t her
I I
'Crosstalk' : 1 VHF, DIE aud c i r sep, lgnd

Radar: 1 airport r d prx sw {E ind i t s shld

Power qual ty: 1 powerline crptr !Bvac ind fil

2 8
il5v no-land '
I
3 I
pwr i n t r p i cap, softwr
I
4 I
del CRT s o f t wr
-

49
 TABLE 2.6-2
AIRFORCE VARIANCES
En I SOURCE EQUIPHEN1 PATH SYHPTOHS REHEDY n s ~
:LASSlFICATION RECEPTOR
-
static: 1 canopy UHF rcv dsch aud 5eP add test
2 ' I I I
,
bnd qnd
3 ant I I I I

4 l I I I I

htrnsnt: 1 powerline crptr wc ind-rdr warn shld,f il add test

2 IFF code tx diode sup,
3 ind-HUD car op sof twr
4 bomb disarr
5 i nd-f 1are
6 del-crptr merry
7 ind-teran fol rdr
8 intphn aud

lOOHz ' ' f i i . J : 1 powerline omega rcv R ind-del seP add t e s t

2 VLF rcv dud fil

IOOHt'H'f ield: 1 powerline intrphn wc aud lqnd inc 'HI

2 crptr del CRT 5eP field
I
3 I
i n d oxy 1evel

:lock hrrncs: 1 crptr ant RE aud f i 1,shld

h r e q . hrrncs: --none

4F-VHF-UHF: 1 tx crptr RE del-cntrl surfce ,

f i l bnd,shld inc RF
2 wiring del-steer qear 1evel
3 I
del-rdr ant
4 I
del-winch
5 I
del-enq speed
I
6 ind-a1 tireter
7 I
aud-intrphn
8 I
del-AIC headng
9 I
del-nav flag
10 vid sig ant rcv aud
11 strb siq I
aud ,del -st i c k
12 dig siq I
aud

Radar: 1 rdr prx sw RE lose antiskid f i l ,bnd,shld inc RF

2 HF tx crptr ind-1 ts 1evel

Power qual ty: 1 powerline crptr 2bv del crptr f i 1,bnd ,shid
2 I
115v dis crptr

50
 EQUlPMENT/ClRCUlT TYPE RANGE OF EXPENSE

EM1 TYPE EM1 LOCATION

Magnetic
Electric Fie1 Electrostatic
Coupling / Charge
XFMR 5%
Field

Radio
Bus
15%
y
Power
Common
M
l mOpdeedance
1oo/o

HF-VHF Engke Tail

20% Landing Gear 5%
10%

EM1 PATH FIXES

5% 1oo/o

Figure 2.6-2 Postulated Hallmarks of Variances

51
 3.0 AVIONICS THRESHOLDS AND PROTECTION

3.1 HARDWARE TOLERANCE

Recognizing the conditions of proper interface wiring design, circuit protection, and the contri-
butions of aircraft structural shielding protection is of course important in a “topdown” elec-
tromagnetic compatibility design of an aircraft, but these recognitions must also be tied
closely to a knowledge of the noise tolerances and noise thresholds of transistors, microcir-
cuits, and logic. The lines can be drawn: environment, protection, threshold.

Airplane environmental noise voltages flourish far above the transistor and microcircuit
thresholds of damage, upset, or offset, which means that microcircuits demand protection in
every case. Transistor-transistor-logicgates and microprocessors do not have even a modest
tolerance to the run-of-the-mill aircraft noise types, such as: electrostatic pulses, lightning-
induced transients, inductive switching transients, or even some high-energy radio frequency
signals.

A Tm logic gate will “change state” at a threshold of about 800 mV when radio frequencies
are injected starting at low frequencies and on up into the megahertz range, but in the tens t o
hundreds of megahertz the threshold rises to greater than 5V before upset occurs. Figure 3.1.1
maps that threshold. Whereas a gate will operate or change state at 800 mV, it may be
damaged if subjected to much greater than 1OV at low frequencies and can usually survive
about lOOV transients that are of microsecond or nanosecond duration depending on thermal
dissipation. As shown in the figure, a transistor or semiconductor “PN” junction will detect
power levels as low as 100 p W under certain conditions.

Microprocessor chips are high density and high speed. Microprocessor circuits may be upset,
change state, or change performance when signals with noise power levels down to 10 p W are
injected on signal, address, or clock lines. As frequency is increased beyond the operational
range of a microprocessor, the power required to cause upset and damage increases. These
levels change with conditions such as loading, circuit geometry, radio frequency paths, and
sometimes software design. Operational factors such as address or memory or timing or pro-
cess changes affect the definition of upset. Under the onslaught of steady state, low-frequency
signals, microcircuits can be damaged at power amplitudes of less than lW,but high frequen-
cies or fast narrow pulses require much higher wattage levels-ten to hundreds of watts.

Individual pulses, measured by their energy content, require anywhere from 10 mJ to 1p J to

cause damage as shown on the figure. Pulse durations are microseconds to nanoseconds.
Awareness of these levels is important when designing the shielding for the aircraft or avion-
ics wiring to protect against high-frequency transients or resonances.

Shielding protection or voltage limiting must be provided to reduce transient noise signals
below the damage threshold. Protection must also be designed to keep continuous wave radio
frequencies below the “L or integrated circuit operational thresholds (figure 3.1-2). Software
can be designed to correct for random, nonrepetitious transients.

Extensive effort in testing, modeling, measuring, and graphing operational upset and damage
levels has been documented in the industry. Minimum and maximum spreads are available.
Voltage damage amplitudes may vary by a factor of two or three, say from lOOV to 300V, from

53
 Voltage Current
OOA

. ...
I kVl I OA

1oov - A

1ov I 100 mA

Threshold
1v mA

100 m V Mhz to 100s MHz

MHz to 100s MHz
Il mA

MHz to 100s MHz

Power Energy
Figure 3.1- 1 Microcircuit Tolerance

Transistor-Transistor Emitted Coupled High-Threshold Complementary Metal

Logic TTL Logic ECL Logic HTL Oxide Logic CMOS
Average 1.2v ’ 100 mV 7.5v 2.2v
Minimum 400 mV - 5v 1.5V
one manufacturer to another, or from one lot to another. The threshold of operation may vary
from 800 mV to 1.5V from one transistor to another. Damage thresholds change by a factor of
ten or more with the number of transient pulses and the rate of applying them. The spreads
and averages are interesting in the study of susceptibilities, but at the bottom line is this:
protection must be built in to account for the minimums-for example, lOOV for transient
damage, 800 mV or less for TTL gate state change, and 10 pW for microcircuit performance
alteration. It is necessary to constrain radio frequency power and stored transient energy
access to avionics by diverting and/or blocking the noise with balanced circuits, filters, or
shields on every input-output interface circuit.

When two conductors are spaced 100 mils (2.5 mm, 2500 pm) apart, and the voltage between
them is slowly increased, an arc will start (at sea level, atmospheric pressure) and establish
itself at around 2000V or 3000V. If there is only 20 mils of spacing (0.5 mm, 500 pm) between
the conductors, the arc will start at 1OOOV. Circuit card conductors have these close spacings.
So it is easy to understand when microcircuits, chips, and thin-film devices with substrate
circuit separations of a few microns fail at 1OOV.

3.2 EM1 AND SOFTWARE

It is difficult to know where to start in the treatment of electromagnetic interference relative

to software in an aircraft context. What is special about an aircraft? How does aircraft electro-
magnetic interference uniquely relate to software?

Not by component failure or damage: damage may appear anywhere, anytime-broken parts-
vibration-faults-mishandling.

Not by errors or deficiencies in software itself: this is the purview of the software designer; he
must compensate for these regardless of aircraft electromagnetic interference. And also, not
especially by the internally generated noise from power and switching regulators, or clocks
and data lines: noise sources found in any electronic package.

The aircraft associated electromagnetic interference arises from power line 400 Hz, radio
frequencies, electrical transients, and power bus momentary interruptions. They are very
different in their characteristics, their occurrence, and their threat of upset. Two of these noise
threats must be eliminated from software concerns right away.

First, 400 Hz is simply 400 cycles per second of a noise voltage from the power line imposed on
a neighboring circuit. Cycle duration time is 2.5 ms; with zero to peak being 625 p s ; the
positive risetime repeats every 2.5 ms. If a balanced circuit is slightly unbalanced and respon-
sive for any reason, the 400 Hz will trigger operation of the balanced circuit continually or,
much worse, in an intermittent fashion. If there is an error or disorder from 400 Hz, then
there has been an error in the original design that must be fixed. Four-hundred Hertz must be
controlled and kept out of interface circuits.

And second, radio frequencies can also be eliminated from software concerns. Aircraft wiring
cannot be allowed in a radio frequency field stronger than the original design specification. If
a digital circuit sees an overlay of an unwanted radio frequency (not damaging, but causing
loss of data), the software will not be able to correct upset. The radio frequency environment
must be known, documented, and immunity designed in to the interface circuits. Transmitter
radio frequency noise and digital data are in the same frequency range, the most important
being HF-V", 1to 300 MHz.

55
Transients are the problem. Electrical transients have existed in the past, they exist today,
and will continue to exist on the airplane as well as in the laboratory. Electrostatic discharge,
lightning, or powerline inductive switching transients are usually of large magnitude (hun-
dreds to thousands of volts). The amplitudes are reduced below circuit damage level (1OOV; a
few amps) by design, but transients are sometimes not totally rejected and they result in
short-term destruction of data words. It is the responsibility of the EMC engineer to supply
threat transient levels and repetition rates to hardware/software designers to assure proper
programming of fault tolerance and detection. What, then, are the time characteristics of
transients relative to data words that the software designer must know to override noise or
make software tolerant to noise?

Some inductive switching transients have ringing frequencies of 10 MHz reoccurring at a 1-

M H z repetition rate and lasting for around 1000 ps (figure 3.2-1). During test, the transient is
repeated every two seconds. (DO-160 specifies 8-10 pulses per second for 10 seconds.) A l2-kHz,
ARINC 429 signal has a bit width of 80 ps and the 32-bit word has a duration of 256 ps. A
1000 ps, inductive switching transient can decimate a 256 ps data word.

An electrostatic discharge, on the other hand, is a very fast 100-ns event (figure 3.2-1) and
probably does not reoccur until after sufficient time, possibly 4 or 5 sec, to recharge the object
originally collecting the charge. This transient might only affect one bit.

Lightning transients have low frequencies, 10 ps or longer, and ringing high frequencies, for
instance at 1 MHz, 3 MHz, and 7 MHz, set up by the electrical resonant lengths of an aircraft
and damped out in a few microseconds, but then they may reoccur again and again under
multiple strokes of a total lightning flash lasting for possibly one second (figure 3.2-1). A
lightning flash might result in disorder in a number of words.
. Inductive
Switching
Transient
2 sec
Test

10
ns
100
#
1 10
A P S
100 +I 1\ 10
\ - m s
100
~.
Power Bus
Dropout
1-MHz r I

256 p s 1000 p s
Lightning
Lightning ARINC Inductive
Transient
Transient 429 Switching
Test
Test Word Transient
Figure 3.2-1. Transient Events

56
Of important concern is the momentary interruption of the power bus, referred to as a “bus
switching” or “dropout” transient, where power drops or decays to zero for up to 50 ms (figure
3.2-1) when the power supply is transferred from ground power to engine power or from one
engine generator to another. (DO-160 has a test requirement of a 200 ms interrupt for ac
equipment, and a 1-second interrupt for dc equipment.) Software control may be required to
ensure a graceful shutdown, proper data storage, or even continued processing.

So the software designer institutes techniques to control equipment operation, override errors,
and make software tolerant to noise when transients and power shutdown occur.

There are a number of methods employed for data correction and resetting, such as:
Microprocessor reset to initial state (“backward”)
Microprocessor forced to known state (“forward”)
Functionally equivalent, but dissimilar backup system
Data word repetition or redundant data supply

There are also a number of means of detecting errors of data, flow, or hardware operation,
such as:

For data checks -

Read after write on output data line
Data bus activity, reasonableness check, data averaging
Bits per word, parity, status bits
Check sums: averages, spreads, maximums, minimums

For flow checks -

Out of sequence, out of loop
Excess or deficient time
Event record of activity ratioed to total program execution (‘‘state activity”)

It may be postulated that the aircrafl has five layers of protection: 1)structure shielding, 2)
circuit shielding, 3) balanced circuit, 4) voltage/ current limiting, 5 ) software. Software is the
last line of defense.

3.3 DIGITAL AND DISCRETE CIRCUITS

3.3.1 ARINC 429 Drivers and Receivers

The ARINC 429 bus, a digital transmission interface system, fans out from the main equip-
ment bay to the flight deck and to external sections in the wing, engine, or empennage. With
two or more 429 circuits per unit, there could be two- to three-hundred individual buses. They
may reach 100 ft (30m) in length, and are routed in bundles where they encounter transients,
radio frequencies, and power line noise. The ARINC 429 “MARK 33” Digital Information
Transfer System (DITS) offers immunity to noise by using a well designed combination of a

57
I balanced circuit, a relatively high-trigger threshold, a “high-resistance” input, and finally,
wire braid shielding. Parity, status bit, and “bits per word” software checks help to extend
protection even further.

*
The output signal of the 429 transmitter measures at the high level, 10 1V “line to line” and
*
at the low level, 0 0.5V. At the other end of the line, the receiver must operate with an input
signal at a high level of 6.5V to 13V and be at a low below 2.5V. The margin from 2.5V to 6.5V
is undefined.

The trigger threshold of operation, therefore, can be 2.5V.

The transmitter driver output resistance is 70Q to 80Q “line to line” and the receiver input
resistance is 12 KQ or greater in each line so that there is at least 12 KQ resistance in the
circuit from transmitter to receiver. That is an important resistance for protection against
transients. The high resistance provides immunity. Just ignoring the shield for a moment, if a
600V transient occurs on the wire and appears at the 12-KQ input, the resulting current
amounts to only 50 mA, a very low “transient” current and not enough energy for damage.

The ARINC specification does not define the circuit ground nor case ground. For shields, the
specification states that: “the circuit should be twisted pair shielded from data source to sink
with the shield grounded at both ends at an aircraft ground close to the rack connector.” Shield
tie length is not defined. The 429 system has been subjected to the RTCA DO-160 electromag-
netic interference tests and passed. Three factors, in implementing this digital bus design,
demand extra effort in manufacture to ensure quality: 1) electrical tolerances of components
(avionics supplier responsibility), 2) shield tie to ground (airframe manufacturer and supplier),
and 3) case ground (airframe manufacturer and supplier). Future digital buses may have
similar noise characteristics and rejection capabilities.

The 429 is a balanced circuit and balanced circuits are important; and also the installation of
shields is important; but grounding decides effectiveness of receiver immunity: the grounding
of the box, the grounding of the circuit, and the grounding of the shields.

3.3.2 Circuit and Shield Grounds

Noise on a single wire in space with no connection to a ground plane cannot be measured, and
no current flows for an “electrically short” wire.

Connect one end to a ground plane and an induced noise voltage in the wire of 1V can be
measured at the other end, the ungrounded end. This is a single wire over ground (figure 3.3-
la) and is the technique used to install the “discrete” circuits on the aircraft. It is susceptible
over the entire frequency range.

If the ungrounded end is left unconnected, practically no current flows and no energy dissi-
pated. That’s an incredibly significant fact when analyzing for protection against damage. If
no current flows, components cannot be damaged. Where circuits are exposed to high-level
I transients on the wing, isolate them at one end if possible.

Now, two wires over a ground plane with resistors between them at each end t o form a circuit
and one end connected to ground, say the source end, sets up the same condition-all the
voltage will be measured at the load end relative to ground, with practically no voltage across

58
 -a -b

End
1 mV-60dB

100 pV -80dB
at Low
10 pV -100dB 10 pv- Frequencies

10 mV - Noise
Rejection
,,v - 80 dB at Low
1mV-
Unbalanced These Curves
100 +V - Circuit
Grounded
for Comparison
Only-Not for
lo
pv
- at Both Ends Specific Design (Depending
on Construction)

-e -f

Balanced Balanced
Circuit 100 mV Circuit
100 mV Grounded
Grounded
10 mV - Both Ends

100 v
, - Noise at
Low
10 pV - Frequencies

PYo 1
o;
c-kHz
; lb
MHz
o
1; ; lb
GHz - -kHz MHz GHz -
Figure 3.3.7 Circuit Noise Rejection (a b c d e f)

59
 the load resistor at low frequencies. This is a two wire, unbalanced circuit (figure 3.3-lb). At
I
the higher frequencies, resonance exists and voltages appear.

A two wire, unbalanced circuit grounded at both ends, source and load, offers practically no
noise rejection, maybe 10 dB or so (figure 3.3-lc). The noise rejection is lost at low frequencies.

Make the circuit a balanced circuit, as the 429 is, and it can establish more than 40 dB of
noise rejection for “differential mode” line-to-line voltages (figure 3.3-ld) at the higher fre-
quencies. The line to ground noise, called “common mode,” remains the same as the unbal-
anced circuit.

In an aircraft installation, it is optional whether or not the balanced circuit is grounded.

Grounding loses some of the low frequency protection (figure 3.3-le). The balanced, isolated
design can offer 80 to 100 dB at low frequencies, just about equivalent to fiber optics or
transformer isolation under practical installation conditions.

Figure 3.3-lf shows a comparison of one shield (like 429) and two shields grounded at both
ends with the circuit and equipment case grounded. If either the circuit or case were lifted
from ground, the circuit would have much more low frequency isolation and protection.

I A balanced circuit (either grounded or isolated) that is double shielded with shields tied to the
case connector and the base surface of the enclosure case grounded is almost always the best.
The circuit can be isolated with a transformer, optical device, or fiber optics. This is the
optimum practical design for low and high frequencies.

3.3.3 Discretes

A “discrete” circuit is designed and installed to indicate events, such as on or off, engaged or
open. Sometimes it is constructed using a single wire (figure 3.3-la) from the electronics bay
out to a unit on the wing where a switch, to provide indication, grounds it to structure using
the structure as the return. Their thresholds are high and, therefore, radio frequency noise is
usually not a problem. But these circuits can be hit with the full force of transients and need
~
to be protected with shielding, voltage or current limiting, or increased power ratings.

3.4 EQUIPMENTWIRING ISOLATION A N D SEPARATION

3.4.1 Quality of Wiring Design

If there are no wires, there is no electromagnetic interference. Wiring takes on different char-
acters in its role as a conductor of signals. It is a signal conductor, driver to receiver. It acts as
a transmitting radiating antenna or a very efficient receiving antenna; it is a party in trans-
former action to participate in voltage-current-energy transfer when in a cable bundle; and it
also acts as an intermediary or a transfer agent to import electrical energy, then retransfer
I that energy to other wiring-sometimes called secondary coupling.

The wiring design is a fabric, a multiweave electrical mosaic. There is a mosaic of conditions:
wire size, grounding, returns, shields, shield ties, separation, and wire length. There is a
mosaic of properties: metals, dielectrics, resistance, inductance, capacitance, impedance, and
nonlinear effects. Careful analysis and development of the design will bring about an accept-
able level of electromagnetic interference and a cost-effective electromagnetic compatibility.

60
 The complexities of the mosaic could be largely dispelled through the simple use of a twisted-
pair-shielded (or coax), balanced-isolated circuit design that reduces noise, and sustains signal
quality. See in figure 3.4-1how the twisted pair shielded, balanced circuit has reduced noise to
an acceptable level. This design provides a winning combination. It is the king of avionic
interface design, boasting a possible noise rejection of 80 dB (10,000 times) and finding wide-
spread use in digital communication or control circuits where stability, quality, and signal
fidelity guarantee performance and confidence. Figure 3.4-1was constructed to illustrate the
general levels of improvement for comparison, but is not appropriate to be used or adapted to
specific designs.

10 kV
10 kV-- Lab Test

1 kV--

1OOV-- Shield Ground

at Both Ends
Degrades
OV-- 400-Hz

1v--

1 111n1 wI
100 mV- -
Balanced Isolated TPS
.- ....
"H-B" Relay
Lightning-
Powerline IRadi: Powerline Inductive
400-HZ Frequencies 400-Hz Switching Resonant
Magnetic Electric Transients Frequency
Field- Field- Nominal (1 MHz)
4A Test Level Test
i

Figure 3.4-1 Circuit Response to EM1

The building blocks to signal wiring quality are threefold: twisted pair for minimum magnetic
field induction, down by 60 dB;shield for minimum electric fields, down by 30 dB or more; and
balanced isolated design for a minimum common impedance, down by 40 dB. For future air-
craf't, it will be necessary to accurately model types of circuits on an aircraft to understand the
induced noise levels and assure desired signal quality. Determination of the actual voltage,
current, power, or energy on the wire circuit is the goal. Current and power become important
when designing the rating or sizing of circuit protection.

There is no easy answer to avionic interface wiring design. Interface circuits can be built (by
careful engineering evaluation, assessment, and construction) t o offer optimum circuit com-
patibility through four fundamental approaches:

61
 1) Equipment and wiring location/grouping/organizationdesign
2) Connector choice and wiring assignment
3) Return current rule
4) Coupling and modeling analysis

Definition of the total circuit is required: the driver, the wiring, the receiver, operating fre-
quency, and intercircuit connections. The following tasks are applicable: identification of all
identical circuits; identification of all common circuits, common returns, every ground connec-
tion, capacitor, or resistor connection; determination of output and input impedances, balanced
and unbalanced impedances to ground. A check of other current paths that are not intention-
ally designed is often appropriate, such as, circuit paths from ground wires through mutual
capacitances (leakage capacitance), through other ground conductors or transformers, shields,
and circuit card grounds.

Identical or common circuits are best assigned to the same connector. Circuit currents should
exit and return in the same connector. Low-frequency signals, less that 1kHz, may return in a
welldesigned aluminum or copper grounding structure where transmission line design tech-
niques are not necessary.

I These rules are constructive:

Separate power and signal (if power must be in the same connector as signal, separate
power and signal by ground pins)
Separate families of circuits in individual connectors by frequency: audio, digital, pulse
width modulation (PWM), video
Position wires for shortest practical route to other equipment
Assign connectors for optimum wire routing to other equipment

Current paths returning in structure are designed to follow immediately adjacent to the cable
(an image path). Currents should not be forced to take a wide path through distant connectors
and structure. This is sometimes called the return current rule.

A simple way to achieve electromagnetic compatibility in wiring or in equipment is by func-

tional or subsystem grouping (figure 3.4-2bthat is, keeping units or equipment of the same
subsystem close together. An early definition and visibility of the system design, configura-
tion, and function must be obtained. Equipment and subsystems and their locations must be
known:
I
1) Primary power, secondary power, distribution boxes, heavy switching (solenoids), lighting
2) Electronic flight control, electronic flight instrumentation, engine electronic controllers

I
3) Navigation, VOR, ILS, and DME
4) Radio transmitterheceivers, HF, VHF'

An early developmental wiring mockup is a requirement for good wiring design. The best
design is grouping the subsystems close together in a n inline design. Generator to receiver,
input to output, and source to load. Individual connectors can be dedicated with common
groups of circuits. Functional grouping can often be extended in the aircraft between units
I

62
 -- f --- One Subsystem
Power - 400 Hz
Signal - Digital
Power - DC
Signal - Analog
All May Share
a Common Bundle
(One Bundle)

\ Close
- Units Located
Together
Functional Group *

Power I
Distribution

--
Power
and Signal
by 2 in f- Signal Bundle Only
2 in

Figure 3.4-2 Wiring Categories

that are widely separated. Here, engineering judgment and analysis is important. Where
functional grouping is used, bundles are more easily separated to comply with redundancy
and safety requirements or a separation of wiring to protect against physical damage to re-
dundant critical equipment such as engine-mounted electronic controllers.

On long wire runs, functional grouping may result in excessive coupling between noisy lines
and susceptible or sensitive lines. Where space is available, it is recommended that wiring be
separated by “signallenergy” categories as follows:
1) Ac feeder power bus; large ac control circuits; heavy current dc or secondary ac switching
circuits valves, motor, or actuator drives; large inductive loads
2) Standard 115V and 28V power; signal circuits and regulated power circuits
3) Low-level, sensitive circuits such as audio, analog, dc reference, or dc secondary power
4) High-power radio frequency circuits (coax) or high-level pulse width modulated (PWM)
circuits

63
 Wire separation is not the best way to reduce noise between circuits, but it is often necessary.
Separation is very effective when used for isolation and redundancy and safety (figure 3.4-3).
Independent computer controls, instruments, power sources, or standby instrumentation are
isolated to increase reliability. Left and right engine powerlines and circuits, as well as engine
indication signals, are separated and isolated. Communication, EICAS systems, ILS, LRRA,
DME, and computer control devices, FMC, ADC, are separated and isolated. Primary controls,
for example-roll, pitch, and yaw and stabilizer or spoiler controls and position sensors-are
isolated.

Wiring on Separate
Connectors and
Isolated (Dielectric
Withstand: 15OOV rms)

Center
Engines
I Left Right
Wing
I

Exposed
Critical
Equipment

Fuselage
Figure 3.4-3 Critical Circuits Wire Separation

3.4.2 Power and Energy Levels

A twisted pair shielded, balanced, isolated circuit, properly designed into the system as an
interface circuit, minimizes the possibilities of noise-induced damage and establishes a basic,
high-quality design. But not all circuits are balanced and use a return wire; some interface
circuits on the airplane have a ground return (structure return).

It is helpful and instructive in the initial design stage of a program to have a concept of the
magnitudes of not only the noise voltage amplitudes but also the power and energy levels of
I radio frequency signals, 400-Hz power, and transient noise that can be imposed on a circuit
that uses structure as the return path. It is important to analyze and define the power level
(for continuous signals) and the energy levels (for transients).

64
One way to do this is by looking at selected electromagnetic interference laboratory test levels
(figure 3.4-5). The test levels shown here are the avionic equipment test levels seen by equip-
ment itself and are not the actual environmental magnitudes that may exist on the aircraft
that the airframe manufacturer must consider, such as, higher levels of radio frequency sig-
nals or lightning transients.

Seven electromagnetic interference types can be listed for the purposes of identifying, summa-
rizing, and comparing their voltage-current-energy and power profiles. In these selected labo-
ratory test setups, certain circuit parameters and conditions must be arbitrarily defined.
Therefore, the levels shown in the figure are illustrative and helpful for making comparisons,
but are not appropriate for detail design conditions and must not be used or adapted to specific
designs. The electrostatic discharge test is not an industry standard test level and is shown
here for comparison to the other forms of noise. The amplitude is arbitrarily set at 10 kV, a
nominal value out of a n actual range of about 3 kV to 50 kV. Referring to figures 3.4-4 and
3.4-5:

1) The radio frequency test induces a low voltage, lV, and a low current, approximately 100
mA, on a single wire that has a ground plane return. Observe on the bar chart the radio
frequency voltage level of 1V and then the radio frequency current level of less than 100
mA, now move down to the power bar chart and see the radio frequency power level of 3
mW. The power level is shown because its a continuous signal. This test is performed in
the laboratory using a current probe to induce the radio frequency voltage measured as
a n open circuit voltage (figure 3.4.5). The test level here is chosen as 1V (in the HF-VHF
range) induced into a wire that is 5m (15-ft)long, the calculated current is the short
circuit current, and the load resistance is adjusted for maximum power.

These radio frequency signal products come from aircraft microprocessor clock and
switching regulator stray noise signals as well as HF-VHF aircraft communication and
HF-VHF television and FM radio broadcast transmitters. Radio frequency carries with it
the ability to sneak through avionics internal circuit capacitors or diodes connected to
power supplies and on a circuit card it will pass from etched circuit trace to trace. The
radio frequencies are not damaging, but they can alter circuit operation and
performance.
2) The power line 400-Hz magnetic field, designated as “H-B” on the chart, delivers a low-
frequency effect into analog circuits or operational amplifiers. Mark on the chart how the
magnetic field might impose 400 mV with a power of 130 mW.

For this laboratory setup, a 40A current is coupled into a 3m (10-ft) section of wire, with a
0.5-cm (0.2 inch) separation, and positioned 5 cm (2 inch) above the ground plane. This
simulates a 4A, 30m (100A-ft) maximum coupling condition on a n aircraft. The power is
calculated for a load resistance equal to the 5m wire resistance.
3) The power line 400-Hz electric field (“E”) also delivers a low-frequency effect into analog
circuits or operational amplifiers. See how the electric field (“E”)is about lOOOV, but note
the extremely low current, less than 1 mA (off the chart). The power level is low but
easily large enough for upset or alteration of equipment performance. Notice here that
the power line test is performed at 10 times the 115V line level, or 1150V, in order to use
a 10-ft coupling length. This simulates a 115V, 100-ft maximum coupling condition on an
aircraft.

65
4) The electrical switching transient test (relay induced transient) may impose voltages of
600V or higher with currents of just a few amps and energies in the range of millijoules-
large enough to damage sensitive solid state devices. For this test, the electrical parame-
ters were estimated with the following values chosen. Voltage: 600V peak to peak; 2A
current; a 1-MHz damped sine wave, repeated 1000 times to simulate a transient of 1-ms
total duration. This is an arbitrary electrical switching transient for illustration only.
5) The 1-MHz lightning-induced transient (designated by the damped sine on the bar chart)
is a damped cosinusoid, has a set 600V amplitude, is transformer-induced into the wire,
has an initial fast risetime of about 100 ns (3 MHz), and is to simulate lightning reso-
nance on the aircraft. The induced current is high but the energy is fairly low.

Voltage-Peak Current-Peak
Open Circuit kV Short Circuit
10 k l

I
1 kL 1 kA

1ooc

1ov
7
-IiE'
1OOA

1OA

1v I 1A
1L

100 mL 100 mA

Sine Wave or Transient

Power Energy
1J

300 mJ I
100 mJ

10 mJ

1 mJ

100 pJ

Sine Wave Transient

Figure 3.4-4 Selected EM1 Levels

66
 4 1 5 4 (5-m) Interface Circuit Wire Length *
“RF” “El*, 16H-Bl1,
“Lightning” Relay
2 in (5 cm) Coupling Length

Wire l&CV 66R”

voc, Isc,
-7/ t Current Probe
or Transformer E and W Matched
Load Ground Plane
Return
Figure 3.4-5 Laboratory Test Setup

6) The so-called “ground potential test” (designated by the pulse waveform on the bar chart)
is a SOOV, lops unipulse or “double exponential” waveform to simulate a controlled light-
ning induced current transient in structure. Observe on the figure the dramatically
higher current, 200A, and much higher energy of the unipulse. The unipulse is a very
powerful noise source. It carries a considerable amount of energy and can easily damage
and destroy electronic components. A balanced circuit design or substantial protection is
needed to divert or block this transient. The test setup is different from that shown in the
figure. The 600V waveform from the transient source is preestablished on a 53 load, then
the voltage is applied with a “source” transformer connected between ground and the
avionics casehousing (and any signal return) where the resulting waveform will vary
depending on avionic equipment circuit loading and wiring design. Any circuit using
structure as return will receive the full impact of this transient.
7) The profile of the electrostatic discharge transient (designated by the “star” on the bar
chart) shows an exceedingly high-voltage pulse of 10 kV, which is capable of causing
dielectric breakdown of insulation rather than the usual condition of thermal burnout of
a semiconductor or microcircuit. The short circuit current can be high but the width or
duration of the pulse is so narrow or short that it results in a low energy level. The
application is different from that shown in the test setup figure. T h e transient is applied
directly to the circuit wire or connector pin. These electrical parameters apply: 150-pF,
50Q source through a l-pH, l m wire to a simulated 503 load for maximum power
transfer.

3.4.3 EMC Quality in Maintenance

Structural shielding, wire shielding, and interface circuit protection-must be maintained

through the life of the aircraft. Here are some of the most important items:
1) Keep the controlled wire routing and the wire separation design intact. The original
design of wiring is formulated to ensure that faults will not propagate, that critical
functions are redundant, and that electrically noisy circuits are separated from vulnera-
ble circuits.
2) Concentrate on maintaining short shield ties to the structure or to “line replaceable
unit” GRU) box if structure is graphite-epoxy. Shield ties or “pigtails” do not usually
receive the attention they warrant. Shield tie length is extremely important in the effec-

67
 tiveness and quality of shielding. A shield tie that is short, less than 2 or 3 inches, is
highly desirable; longer lengths, 6 inches or more, degrade the entire shield. The best
termination is to the connector backshell. Future connectors will have backshells and
filter pins that will need maintenance.
Maintain electrical bonding and grounding quality. Careful surface preparation, proper
joining techniques, care of bonding straps, and finally adequate conductive sealing of
joints and seams ensure the continuation of the excellent shielding and electrical ground-
ing provided by structure.
Be aware of electrostatic discharge. Electrostatic discharge is a key intruder in handling
and maintenance procedures. Microcircuits may be impaired or destroyed by a pulse from
a hand or an item of clothing. The event can go unnoticed. Conductive materials and
grounding procedures, along with a training program, will provide techniques for failure
prevention.

3.4.4 Shielding and Shield Ties

Shields may be single braid; double braid; braid and foil; shields inside an overall bundle
shield; solid conduit, tray, or cableway; and aircraft structure.

The shielding effectiveness (SEI of shields is based on materials and dimensions and circuit
connections and impedances and shield tie lengths and has been one of the most elusive
electromagnetic compatibility protective defenses to pin down. (A significant issue for future
aircraft needing to be addressed is that of the wiring lengths installed during laboratory tests
versus the actual aircraft installed length.) Length influences SE and SE can dictate length or
design. A single braided shield with a 2-inch shield tie may offer less than 25 dB of protection
over the span of 10 kHz to 100 MHz. A long wire, 100 R (30m), may only show 10 dB above 1
MHz at some resonant frequencies under certain conditions. A solid 360-deg connection to a
backshell can improve protection. Conditions that establish the grounding of shields vary, but
there are some that need emphasis:
1) Ground audio or analog shields at receiver end only
2) Ground digital or wideband signal circuit shields at both ends
3) Ground shields subjected to high frequencies (greater than 50 kHz) at both ends
4) Ground shields that contain or are a barrier to transients at both ends
5) When audio and high-frequency requirements conflict then the circuits and installation
must be evaluated. (Solution may be rerouting of wires or double shielding.)

Carrying a shield tie through an avionics unit connector, into the internal wiring harness, and
to a circuit card connector is poor wiring practice. A 360-deg, peripheral shield connection to
the backshell is the best (figure 3.4-6).

3.5 AIRCRAFT PROTECTION MEASURES

3.5.1 Structure Conductivity

Conductivity is the predominant electromagnetic compatibility consideration of materials in

the basic steps to a unified aircraft structure design (figure 3.5-1). What are the separate
electrical functions so highly dependant on conductivity (figure 3.5-2).

68
 Figure 3.4-6 Shield Ties

/ and
Weight

/
Figure 3.5-1 The Grounding Steps

69
Equipotential Ground Plane Radio Frequency Shield
Reference (Stability and Radar (Critical
Performance) Radio or Equipment
Television Operation)

Safety Fault Path Lightning Diversion Path

(Passenger and Personnel Electrostatic Drain
Protection) (Passenger Safety and
Equipment Protection)
n n

Power and Signal Separation-Isolation Redundancy

Return Path (Critical Equipment Operation)
weight and Cost Reduction)

Figure 3.5-2 Structure EMC Roles

70
 Electrical stability: A low noise ground reference plane-a stable zero reference founda-
tion for electrical and electronic circuit and shield ties\(may have less than 500-mV
ground noise). This electrical “ground” embodies structure, shelving, skin, spars, equip-
ment chassis, and possibly uniquely installed grids, sheets, and foil.
Shielding: Aircraft structure, skin panels-foils, flame spray, plating, paint-shelves,
equipment enclosures, and wire shields. Shielding affords a barrier to external and inter-
nal radio frequencies, 400-Hzelectric fields, and 600V transients.
Fault path: Structure, skin panels, cable shields, safety wiring (green wire). The engi-
neered fault paths divert currents to assure safety of passengers and personnel, prevent
hazardous voltages, avoid ignition of combustibles (fire prevention), and limit equipment
failure and upset.
“Diverter”: Structure, skin panels. The aluminum aircraft inherently offers the current
control paths and bypass to eliminate shock hazard and damage from electrostatic charge
and lightning.
Signal return and power return: Cost and weight savings accrue through the use of
structure as a return instead of the installation of wire.
Reliability and redundancy: Parts of the aircraf€ may be employed as a baffie or wall to
provide separation of wiring or equipment.

The engineering of the structure, et al., to accommodate all of the electrical functions, entails
detail design of electrical interfaces, bonding straps, foils, paints, etc. (figure 3.5-3).Bonding
resistance tests can be made during the aircraft EMC test (see Section 7.0).

It is illustrative and instructive to compare an aircraft with an electronics facility to help

recognize the significance of the aluminum structure as a substantive electrical component
(figure 3.5-4). Except for framing, many of the facility building materials are not conductive.

The electrical functions so freely supplied by the airplane structure must be built into a
properly constructed facility using extra materials and supports. Whereas the airplane unifies
the functions, in the facility they are separate (figure 3.5-5).

3.5.2 Shielding

Aluminum, after copper, is one of the best electromagnetic shields. Its effectiveness varies
with thickness and frequency. One or two thousandths (1or 2 mils) is good (figure 3.5-6).

Wherever shielding, grounding, or conductive properties are lost at joints and seams (figure
3.5-7)or are not available from structure and therefore continuity is compromised, shielding
must be added. Aluminum foil, flame spray, plating, and paint are candidate solutions (figure
3.5-8).

Foil (aluminum or copper) is a good shield, conductor, and reference plane. Foil may bring with
it an increased effort to establish quality of bonding to adjacent parts, reliability under envi-
ronment and vibration, and integrity and durability. Moreover, the foil size, thickness, and
geometric configuration dictate its economy of installation. Foil can make a good wire shield.

71
 \
Aluminum

Resistance, //
Fiberglass
All Control
Nonconductive
or High-Resistance

ve

. .
\IAvionics I/- Foil or Mesh
\equipment Bay

Resistance,
Terminations 100 pLS2
Resistance, Ground
20 mil Connectors Reference Ground ‘Dual Ground
to Structure Plumbing Hazardous
Combustible
Wet Zone
Resistance, 10 pQ

I
- Aircraft Resistance,
.~

100 to 500 pLn I

Aircraft
Electrical Bond: Total Electrical Bonding
All structure, panels, skin, pumps, and Conductivity
valves, tubes, flanges,
mountings, avionics, housings,
doors, foil, and mesh.
“Any conductive part greater than
3 in (7.6 cm) on a side”
Figure 3.5-3 Details and Installation

72
 Ground Well
Earth Electrodes
Figure 3.5-4 The Seven Earth Ground Connections

Lightning
<
Path
-
- I -
Isolation
Shield (c-0
Reference
Plane
'-' Equipment/
People

- Path

A. Aircraft Structure Unified EMC Functions

t
Instrument Facility
Safety Lightning
Power Power
(Fault) Path
Return Return

8. Facility Individual Installations and Connections

Figure 3.5-5 EMC Anatomy Block Diagram

73
 Two Tightly
Joined Aluminum

Magnetic Field
Shielding
Effectiveness,
dB

I I I I1111

10 100 1 .o 10 100 1 10
kHz MHz GHz

Figure 3.5-6 Magnetic Field SE of Aluminum

Attenuation
LOSS-dB

Frequency in Mc

Figure 3.5-7 Loss of SE with Joint Finish

74
Shielding
Effectiveness- -dB

Figure 3.5-8 SE Comparison

Flame spray applications (aluminum, copper, or zinc), even by skilled operators, can be diffi-
cult to apply in a controlled fashion. The resistance of flame spray coatings is higher and
shielding effects lower even with greater thicknesses than foil. Its dense coat and coarse finish
on a substrate can lead to flaking or cracking under vibration and moisture conditions with
obvious loss of qualities.

Paints (metal or containing conductive agents or fillers) provide good shielding and are used
successfully. Insulating or moderately resistive material (graphite-epoxy) may be painted to
provide shielding or conductivity or they may be overlaid with aluminum mesh or foil.

Wire shielding provides another layer of protection (figure 3.5-9). Aircraft structural shielding
is a n important companion to wire shielding. The levels of shielding effectiveness are com-
puted for each wiring run location and configuration to determine the accurate values and
these can then be combined with modeled and calculated values of structural shielding. Fig-
ure 3.5-10shows some SE levels for silver or gold film that might be deposited on glass and
aluminum or copper screen that could be for shielding ventilation ports on equipment. The
front and rear spar areas exhibit very poor shielding. The figures depict nominal or typical
estimated levels. Shielding exhibits such wide spreads and variations around these levels
(dependant on conditions), and especially as frequency varies that these summary representa-
tions are useful as a tutorial tool, but are not appropriate as a design tool.

75
 80

70

60

Shielding 50
Effectiveness,
dB 40

30

20

10

01
Open Tie, 8-in Tie, 2-in ’’ Braid Foil Foil Conduit
Braid Braid and
Configuration Braid
Figure 3.5-9 Wire SE Comparison at HF-VHF

HF-VHF
Range Only

Despite Windows

Shielding
Effectiveness
dB
HF, VHF, Than AI

10 ~
Films
--
0
Silver and Aluminum Titanium Graphite- Electtktatic Fiberglass
Gold and Copper Epoxy Paints or Kevlar
Aircraft Materials

Figure 3.5-7 0 MaterialKonfiguration SE Overview

76
3.5.3 Safety in Grounding and Returns

Structure is a ground and a return. Seven separate grounds or returns on electricaVelectronic

equipment can be identified. Some of these groundheturns are interconnected and perform
common functions. Certain individual grounds are always separated to avert mixing noisy
and sensitive circuits.
1) Case enclosures or housings (electrical/electronic equipment) ground: May be a wire or
the case surface. This case enclosure ground acts as a safety ground (fault return), a static
ground, and a radio frequency ground. It sometimes is a signal return and possibly a
115V, 400-Hzreturn.
2) 115V, 400-Hzreturn: Isolated and brought out of the equipment on a separate wire (fig-
ure 3.5-11). A twisted pair power supply circuit will improve electromagnetic
compatibility.

11 5

Return
V T p I AC
Preferred Methods

DC p
x DC

(Acceptable)
7- -
Case G;ound(s) /-
Unsatisfactory
(Off-the-Shelf-Hardware)
115V AC
(As Required) or 28 VDC
Return

(Acceptable) fJ-
7- Case Ground@)

-
Unacceptable
n
11 AC
115V 28V DC 11 5 V r F f l G D C

Return
51- V ;F
I
K q I D C
1
-L
Case Ground(@

Figure 3.5-1 1 Power Returns

77
3) 28V, 400-Hz return.
4) 28V, dc return.
5) Audio or analog circuit return.
6) Digital circuit return.
7) Shield ties (pigtails).

Certain case enclosures require dual grounding in a flammable leakage zone or water expo-
sure area possibly around wing, cargo, and tail locations to offer redundancy and safety in
case of electrical fault. Power returns are brought out of these zones before being terminated
to structure. Each circuit is exhaustively reviewed for voltage, current, resistance, and poten-
tial voltage drop at each connection. MIL-B-5087 gives resistance limits of 6 mQ to 11 FQ
maximum when computed fault currents are 50A to 7 kA.

3.5.4 Resistance

Two and one-half milliohms (0.0025Q) is the most often quoted resistance maximum for a
termination or connection when designing for electromagnetic compatibility. It is applied to
wire terminations, case enclosures, mounts, shelves, panels, doors, and radio frequency com-
ponents. The 2.5-mQlimit is appropriate wherever any component or structure forms a part of
the ground plane, shielding, fault path, or power or signal return.

Panels, rails, frames, access doors, all conductive items in the flight deck are bonded espe-
cially to reduce electrostatic discharge.

Pumps, valves, flanges, lines, vents, and penetrations in the fuel tank are bonded especially to
prevent arcing from lightning. Transport aircraft undergo thorough research and assessment
of conductivity or resistance. It is sometimes difficult to attain 2.5 mQ. The resistance of
aluminum is a good basis for comparison of other materials (figure 3.5-12 and figure 35-13].

Ground planes establish the electrical foundation for any system. Copper is practical, afforda-
ble, and is usually employed in the electromagnetic compatibility laboratory (figure 35-14].
Currents flowing in copper have a low IR drop and therefore provide a low noise system.
Aluminum usually offers good conductivity through faying surface bonds or permanent joints.
A number of factors affect resistance: pressure and surface finish are significant (figure 3.5-15
and 3.5-16).

When components do not form a part of the electrical design but must be grounded for safety, a
1Qresistance is often adequate. Where electrostatic charge buildup is of concern on noncon-
ductive materials such as on external dielectric surfaces, the resistance limit may be allowed
to be much higher. Military Handbook 263 gives 500 kQ to 100 MQ as the range to adequately
drain away electrostatic charge.

In summary, the complexity of the joining process and its maintenance is contrasted by the
simplicity of the electrical bonding resistance limit: 2.5 mQ. Aluminum is the grand conduc-
tive foundation. The part that it plays cannot be overstated. It stabilizes, shields, conducts,
isolates, and protects.

78
Resistar
Square

Figure 3.5- 7 2 Material/Resistance Overview

79
 1 GO
100 Mn
10 MQ
1 Mn

100 kn
10 k n
1 kn
1oon
Resistance
1on
10

100 mn

10 mil
1 mQ
100 pn
10 j4n
1 un

Material

Figure 3.5-13 Configuration/Resistance Overview

80
 10 mfl
I I (Aluminum: Multiply by = 1.5 to 3) I

1 mfl

Resistance/
Square
100 pQ

10 pfl

rnlOHz 100Hz 1 kHz 10 kHz 100kHz 1 MHz 10 MHz 100 MHz

15

10
Resistance per Unit Area
pQ/in2

0
20 40 60 80 100%
Pressure, Percent of Yield
Sections of 2024 Aluminum Alloy Under
Compression With Joint Sanded Prior to Test

Figure 3.5- 15 Resistance krsus Pressure

81
 1 GR
100 MR
10 Mi2
1 Mfl
100 k n
10 kR
1 kR
1OOR
1on
1R
100 mn
10 m Q
1 ma
100 p n
10 /.la
1 cm

c
-
c
-

\ Y \ /

Aluminum Finish Joint Graphite-Epoxy

Figure 3.5-7 6 Joint Finish Resistance

3.5.5 Resonance

Aluminum structure and single wires as conductors have a drawback. They resonate (figure
3.5-17).Structure and single wires must be avoided in high-frequency circuit design.

3.6 COMPOSITES

Graphite-epoxy is a fair to good conductor and shield.

Kevlar and fiberglass are insulators and have no affect on radio frequency fields. Dielectric
structural materials need to be modified to provide electromagnetic shielding.

Nonmetallic materials form many parts in today’s aircraf%(figure 3.6-1)and are expected to
increase in the future. When varieties of materials are brought together, the interfaces lead to
escalating possibilities of material mismatch between finishes, fasteners, and adhesives with
possible adverse implications for the quality of electromagnetic compatibility.

Graphite-epoxy will conduct and will shield. Electric field shielding is very good. Following is
a comparison of appropriate electromagnetic compatibility-related characteristics:
1) Dc resistivity: more than 1000 times greater than aluminum in longitudinal direction
and 100 thousand to 1 million in the transverse direction.
2) Joint resistance: 30 m12 to 112 or higher. Graphite-epoxy is first, difficult to fasten to
electrically, and second, the connection is difficult to maintain. New techniques and bet-
ter procedures are being developed. Today, graphite-epoxy cannot be used as a power or
signal return.

82
 10 k n -
I I
1 kQ
Aircraft and Wirina
I
n l
'Oon For Co!parison
Only
1on .

.-
111 I
I I 1
Induced Voltage
- I I I

100 ma ,Aircraft Resistance .

Direct Current (dc)
10 mQ

1 mn

100 /An

10 / A l l

1 /An
10Hz 100Hz 1 kHz 10kHz 100kHz 1 MHz 10MHz 100MHz
Frequency
Figure 3.5-17 Aircraft and Strap Resonance

KEVLAR FAIRING
Analyze for Added
Shielding Requirements
Such as Foil
Ailerons Rudder

Landing Gear Doors

Figure 3.6-1 Typical Nonmetallic Applications

83
3) Magnetic shielding starts at about 1MHz, rises to 60 dB at 100 MHz with about 35 dB in
the HF-VHF range.

If graphite-epoxy is not well bonded at seams and joints, it will not act as a shield.

If composites are used extensively for structure, the greatest impact is in providing for a
ground plane, and the signal return system, and the power return system, which will require
their own installations of wire, conductive foils, strip, or cableways. Graphite-epoxy resistance
is too high to provide a n adequate ground plane (except for antennas). Figure 3.6-2 shows the
general level of resistance of a large cylinder or tube, and indicates that its use as a power
return path and signal return path is unsatisfactory.

If graphite-epoxy or insulating materials are built into the structure, loss of shielding may
open up a path for noise from fluorescent lights, switching regulator and clock oscillator
harmonics to reach the ADF, HF, or VHF receivers. Or, in turn, HF frequencies may enter
wiring and the avionics. The effects of radio frequence electromagnetic interference are be-
coming more of a concern (figure 3.6-3). Figure 3.6-4 illustrates some of the resistance levels
that might be encountered and shows the use of twisted pair or twisted pair shielded wire.

In the world of electromagnetic compatibility, our protection and safety lies in an integrated
design: architectural or structural shielding, shielded wiring, interface circuit voltage limit-
ers, and software correction techniques. The soul of electromagnetic compatibility is a bal-
anced, isolated, shielded interface circuit. It is practically impervious to conductive, inductive,
and capacitive attack of electrical noise.

200
200

Variation in Resistance
With Surface, Fiber
150

mQ
100 Circumference
40-mil (1-mm)
Thick Tube

50

0.25m 2.5m 25m 250m

0.83 ft 8.3 ft a3 ft 830 ft
0
1 in 10 in 100 in 1,000 in 10,000 in
Length

Figure 3.6-2 Graphite-Epoxy Resistance

84
 SE
dB

For Comparison 25 dB
Only Structure
10

Nonconductive
or High-Resistance
ive

Foil or Mesh
Resistance -

Aircraft Resistance,

Figure 3.6-4 Graphite-Epoxy Details and Installation

85
 4.0 EMC ANALYSIS AND ENVIRONMENT

4.1 RADIATED ENVIRONMENT

4.1.1 Radio Frequency Field Distribution

4.1.1.1 Environment

The electromagnetic radio frequency spectrum is vast. Electromagnetic radio frequency field
strengths-measured in volts per meter-vary widely. But, how do we bind them and treat
them so we understand their significance? Well, for the purposes of electromagnetic interfer-
ence simplicity, one might say we, as humans, and the aircraft, as an object, exist in a dimen-
sional world of roughly 300m to l m which, converted to radio waves, is 1M H z to 300 MHz.

That is very important for electromagnetic compatibility.

The ANSI radio frequency protection guide for personnel has the strongest field strength
limitation over the span of 3 to 300 MHz. People, airplanes, wiring, and the avionics equip-
ment itself are most susceptible to the frequency spectrum spanning the range of 1 to 300
MHz. This is the HF-VHFrange (figure 4.1-1). The conditions and behavior of radio frequen-
cies are sometimes so complex that radio frequency measurement and design efforts have
often been given the title of “black art.” Stray fields, cavities, diffraction, absorption, reso-
nance, constructive interference, destructive interference: all of these interact to make the
details of radio frequency studies conceptionally difficult over some of the transitional fre-
quency ranges.

The spectrum of radio frequency fields that penetrate aircraft wiring and enter into the avi-
onic inputs to attack integrated circuits can be bounded and summarized over three basic
regions:
1) A low-frequency below 1 M H z where radio frequency noise is normally less of a concern
because fields are very inefficiently received on a wire.
2) The high-frequency and very high frequency region, 1to 300 MHz, where radio frequency
fields are very much of a concern and aircraft wiring acting as an antenna is efficient.
3) An upper frequency range above 300 MHz where induced voltages in wiring drop off
rapidly with increasing frequency and are easier to control.

High-frequency (HF) and very high frequency (VHF), ground-based FM radio and TV broad-
cast signals join with their airborne companions, the aircraft HF and VHF communication
links, to induce significant voltages on aircraft wiring in the 1-to 300-MHz range. HF-VHF
field strengths measured at ground level for selected urban, suburban, and rural areas are
plotted in Figure 4.1-2. At altitude, stronger fields can exist (see Section 8.0, Bibliography,
ECAC study). The American National Standard (ANSI)prsonnel safety limit and the Military
Handbook 235 Environmental lkst Specification are plotted for comparison.

Figures 4.1-3 through 4.1-8 give a general view of the expected induced voltages (in some
specific wires under selected conditions) and also a comparison of related environments. This
information and data is illustrative and advisory to resolve significance and make compari-
sons of parametric properties and behavior and is not for use or adaptation to specific designs.

O‘

FRECEDtNG PAGE CLANK NOT FiLWD

 MEDIUM VERY HIGH ULTRA HIGH SUPER HIGH
FREQUENCY HIGH FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQUENCY
I I I I 1
I I 1' I

I
I
I
I
HF-VHF SPECTRUM
II
I
I
I AIRCRAFT AND WIRING PREDOMINANT RESONANT FREQUENCIES I
I I
I
I I

I AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD SAFETY LEVELS

SPAN OF LOWEST LEVELS
I

11 2 3 4 5678911 2 3 4 5678911 2 3 4 5678911 2 3 4 5678911 2 3 4 567891

I l l 1'1 I I I I I Ill I I 1 I I I l l 1 I I I I
4 3 2 98765 4 3 2 198765 4 3 2 198765 4 3 2

ANSI
Limit
Maximum Measured
Near High-Power
Broadcast Station
E on the Ground 7 20 VI,., VHF

B ,k
:i
E Survey VHF
2 lOOm to
2
% > 500m
- 1 120 Distance

+ I Installations

1
E 100 m vim MH-235
5 100 100
E P
FM-VHF
Rural
Level

- 10 80

Figure 4.1-2 Selected RF Fields: HF-VHF Range

88
 1 kV
1oov
1ov
1v
100 mV
Induced lo mV
Voltage 1 mV
100 pv
10 pv
1 PV
100 nV
10 nV
0 100 1 10 100 1 10
kHz MHz GHz
Frequency

Figure 4.1-3 Expected Wire Voltage-Eight feet

." 1 . 1

10 100 10 100 1 10
kHz MHz GHz
Frequency

Figure 4.1-4 Environments, Safe@ and Test

89
 1 kV 1 I 1
TTL
1oov Threshold''
1ov Increases-a 1-Vlm RF Field -
1v
100 mV
Induced 10 mV
Voltage

100 pv
10 pv
1 PV
I I I I I
I
I 1 I I 1
10 100 1 10 100 1 10
kHz MHz GHz
Frequency

Figure 4.1-5 A Tansistor Threshold

1 kV
1oov
1ov
1v
100 mV

Induced 10 mV
Voltage Coupled into a Coaxial
Over a Ground Plane
100 @V
10 pv

10 100 1 1-0 100 1 10

kHz MHz GHz
Frequency

Figure 4.1-6 Representative Coax Voltage Coupling

90
 Coupled to Another

10 100 1 10 100 1 10
kHz MHz GHz
Frequency

Figure 4.1- 7 Representative Secondary Coupling

10 100 1 10 100 1 10
kHz MHz GHz
Frequency

Figure 4.7-8 Graphite-Epoxy or AI Shielding Added

91
 Aircraft structures and avionics are engineered and designed by the airframe manufacturer
and subcontractors to limit and control these fields. Some lines are shielded, some filtered, and
others incorporate a balanced circuit design that will very effectively reject most radio
frequencies.

Another main defense against HF-VHF radio frequency signals is a comprehensive and all-
inclusive electrical bonding system of all aircraft structural shielding materials to eliminate
resistive seams and open seams or apertures. During a specific design program, it is becoming
more and more necessary to develop a sophisticated set of models and computations to charac-
terize and define the particular installation and uncover the behavior of the radio frequency
fields and induced voltages.

So, in summary, the H F - V " frequencies are important to aircraft designers because the
wiring, equipment, structure, and the aircraft itself, having the same dimensions as the radio
frequencies, become efficient antennas.

4.1.1.2 Resonant Behavior

Resonance is the ingredient that brings the arcane aspect to electromagnetic interference.
Resonance, standing waves, and reflections share a commonality with black magic in their
illusory and unseen character. Electrical parameters, voltage, and current, under the influ-
ence of the infinite variability of resistance, capacitance, and inductance, depending on the
number of electrical poles, and when viewed over the frequency spectrum, may start out with
I high impedance and fall quickly to a short circuit minima, then curve back to a maximum, or
on the other hand, the impedance may start low and rise to open circuit values. Voltage and
current in RLC circuits may rise and fall with periodicity or in one simple cycle. They may
reach constant highs and lows, or may vary with inconsistency. Resistance, capacitance, and
inductance vary endlessly with material electrical properties and length, size, and height
above ground. But, they are bounded by maximum and minimum envelopes and the spreads,
although large, are limited.

In a shield room, standing waves on wiring may rise up at around 10 MHz. Shield room
resonance itself usually is around 50 MHz depending on size. On a large transport aircraft,
resonance may occur around 1 M H z and continue into the higher frequencies. The fuselage
may resonate at 1 MHz, the wing and other structural details at higher frequencies.

In a balanced transmission line circuit, resonance is kept to a minimum; signal stability and
quality are maintained.

Single wires and braids (at their resonant frequencies in the 10s and 100s of MHz) offer very
high impedances. A 40-inch, or 24-inch, or 9-inch wire or braid at 70 MHz (the VHF range)
may have an impedance that has risen to 10 kQ. A 4-inch long braid or a #20 wire exhibits
about 500Q at 100 MHz, roughly the same frequency range. With this kind of impedance
increase and resonant condition, adding a wire connection between a circuit and ground may
alter the surrounding field strength levels by 10 or 20 dB.The significant consideration here
is that they are not stable conductors. As soon as appreciable capacitance and inductance are
added, conductor quality is lost in a single wire or braid.

I In unencumbered space, radio frequencies behave linearly, constantly, and predictably. Intro-
duce conductors, metallic planes, and a range of materials, resistance, dielectrics, and vary

92 c -2
the structure and cabling shape orientation and location, then only modeling and measure-
ment techniques can focus on and map the radio frequency fields with any accuracy and
reliability.

Even though there is a wide range of variation in the HF-VHF radio frequency region, the
testing and measuring is performed in an equivalent shield room, metallic environment, com-
plementary to the aircraft fuselage metallic environment. Increased field strengths from reso-
nant and reflection activity in the shield room have been, in fact, a rough emulation of the
final installation.

4.1.2 Magnetic and Electric Field Distribution

From the 400-Hzpowerline, those ubiquitious unidentical twins, electric field and magnetic
field, although easy to contain or block, nevertheless criss-cross the length and breadth of
today’s aircraft and are present in every bundle and on every circuit. The magnetic field
permeates all materials. It may couple to other wires. A wire with 4A may cause noise volt-
ages up to 400 mV (figure 4.1-9)depending on wire length. These noise voltages can mar the
signal fidelity of input circuitry of analog sensors, passenger entertainment, radio headsets or
interphones. The electric field charges all materials. It can induce high voltages. A 100-Rwire
with 160V peak, 115V rms, may induce over lOOV peak (figure 4.1-10)onto high-resistance
circuits. These noise voltages will pester operational amplifiers or comparator circuits, al-
though they will ignore low-resistance analog or digital signal drivers.

These twin marauders, almost always together, ?e strengthened with increasing bundle
length and encouraged by proximity of common wire routing. The magnetic field and electric
field induced voltages of Figure 4.1-9and 4.1-10have been plotted together on Figure 4.1-11
and shown with the added variable of wire separation-the other dominant wire coupling
parameter. See in Figure 4.1-11how the induced voltage drops with wire separation.

1 kV

1oov

1ov

1v
Induced
Voltage
100 mV

10 mV

0.1 ft 10cm 1 ft lm loft 10m 100ft lOOm

Meter Wire Coupling Length

Figure 4.1-9 “H ” Field Coupling

93
 1 kV

1oov

1ov
t 115V, 400-HZ
Electric Field Induced Voltage
(Adjacent Circuit
Resistance) \ I
1v
Induced r-- ‘--
Voltage
100 mV

10 mV

1 mV

1 I 1 I I I I
0.1 ft 10cm 1 ft lm loft 10m 100ft lOOm
Wire Coupling Length

Figure 4. 1- 10 “E” Field Coupling

coupled into an adjacent wire by 160-V-peak

potential causing electric field coupling
and 4-Arms current causing magnetic field

1oov
I I Y

Induced Induced
Voltage Voltage

Figure 4. 1- 1 1 Coupling krsus Separation

94
Now, there is one exception to the design panacea of using a twisted pair shielded circuit as
the perfect defense against electromagnetic interference. On present day aircraft, a circuit,
even though it is twisted pair, will be subject to magnetic field induced voltages if it has a
shield and the shield and the circuit are grounded at both ends. (Aluminum aircraft structure
carries the 400-Hz power line return currents. The 400-Hz current will thus travel in shields
grounded at both ends. The shield current then transfers a voltage to the internal circuit.) A
balanced isolated circuit design or double shielding will compensate. The first twin, magnetic
field, induces voltages on other wires in a bundle, but it also radiates out from the bundles
into the aircraft interior space and into equipment (figure 4.1-12). The radiated magnetic field
emanating from the power lines varies in field strength from microgauss to gauss (milliamps
per meter to amps to meter). The fields are of interest when flight deck cathode ray tube
displays, hand-held transceivers, and microphones are present whose operational function rely
on the use of magnetics for control or display processes. The magnetic field will easily cause
distortion or “banding” on display tubes or will develop the sound of a 400-Hz “hum” in a
speaker. Magnetic fields drop off in magnitude very rapidly with distance.

10 mT

800 A/m 1 mT 10G’ I

Avionics Eauioment

80 Aim 100 pT

8 A/m 10 pT

800 mA/m 1 PT

80 mA/m 100 nT

8 mA/m 10 nT

800 pA/m 1 nT

80 pA/m 100 pT

I 1 I I I
8&m 10 p i
1 mm 10mm 100mm 1M 10 M 100 M
0.044 0.4 in 4 in 40 in

-
mG Milligauss -
pT Microtesla
-
pG Microgauss -
mT Millitesla
-
G Gauss pA/m - Micro A/m
-
pT Picotesla -
mA/m Milli A/m
-
nT Nanotesla -
A/m Amps/Meter

Figure 4.1- 12 Magnetic Fields

95
The second twin, the 115V electric field from 400-Hz power lines, is in almost every aircraft
cable bundle. The power line wire has a 115V rms (160V peak) potential. Another wire circuit
brought into proximity of the 115V wire holds the 115V potential unless it is destroyed by the
“electrical resistor divider” action of a low resistance on the adjacent or “victim” circuit.
Figure 4.1-11 shows the reduction of voltage with reduced resistance on the adjacent circuit.
The resistance is the parallel resistance of source and load. Either a low resistance or a shield
will stop electric field coupling.

Electric and magnetic fields are protected against and dealt with by careful attention to wir-
ing details and design such as the use of twisted pair wire, shielding, balanced circuits, or
fiber optics.

4.1.3 Transients

A 115V power line supplying an inductive load, when interrupted with opening of a switch or
circuit breaker, will create an electrical switching transient often called an “inductive switch-
ing transient” or a “relay-induced transient.” Electrical switching transients from lights, fans,
pumps, or control surface actuator operation reach levels of 600V. Their duration can be over 1
ms, and their rise times nanosecond to microseconds. They harbor repetitive ringing wave-
forms or pulses (figure 4.1-13). These recurring ringing frequencies span the 1 to 10-MHz
range. The switch opens, an electrical arc is started, and an inductive coil unloads stored
energy through the arc in repetitive pulses onto a wire-a wire that may be bundled with
other circuits carrying digital data or analog signals. The high-frequency energy is transfer-
red capacitively and inductively to those circuits and directly into the internal harnessing and
etched circuit card traces and microcircuits of an avionic unit. The electrical transient distrib-
utes to microprocessor clock, timing, or data lines.

Inductive
Switching
Transient Duration Repetition Ringing Risetime
---F--r--

Figure 4.1- 13 Transient Ringing

Very extensive measurements have been made of transients and their characteristics. L. Bach-
man states in his 1981 report: “This paper summarizes the results of the most comprehensive
study ever conducted of U. S. Navy shipboard power line transients. Transient data was ac-
quired on 13 ships-over 9400 hours of monitoring time-2300 transients were encountered.’’
Figure 4.1-14 is a summary. This study is remarkable in its extent and completeness. These
transients show very similar, if not identical, characteristics of magnitude, risetime, and dura-
tion to those measured on commercial aircraft. In contrast to the high-level, inductive switch-
ing transient, the power bus may also experience momentary power interruptions, where the
voltage drops to zero for as long as 50 ms.

96
 700

-
-- One
Per
120-Volt
Power
600

500 - - Year Line

Frequency
-
.-> 50
-
a
-
u)
400 Hz 3 40 -
5 400 - 2
> Electrical
n
300 - Transient
Amplitude
- a 30-
P)
0
C
-
200

100
-- -Lii I
n
$20-
t
10 -
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
J
,, I
I 1 I 1 I
1
I I

0.05 0.1 0.2 1 10 100 1000

Microseconds
Figure 4.1- 14 Electrical Transients

Electrostatic discharge is another form of transient that can suddenly erupt under the right
conditions of humidity, air or fluid flow, and juxtaposition of materials. Electrostatic dis-
charges have much higher voltages up to and over 10 kV,but much narrower pulse widths,
possibly a 100-ns duration. A person on a dry Arizona-like day touching an avionic unit may
discharge 10,OOOV onto the housing or wiring.

One of the most evident electrical discharges, of course, is lightning. Large currents flow on
the wing structure, fuselage, landing gear, or empennage leaving induced voltages in unpro-
tected circuits. These induced voltages have resonant behavior often established by the char-
acteristic of the size of the aircraft and length of wiring. Lightning protection is engineered to
divert and contain voltages and currents in metallic structure to avoid damage to electrical
wiring and parts. The transient voltage levels induced in wiring are required to be less than
600V. Induced voltages are usually less than 200V for the most severe strikes.

So you see, HF-VHF radio frequencies, 400-Hzpower, and the various transients are electro-
magnetic interference or noise forms that are freely distributed and transferred into micropro-
cessors to affect aircraft performance unless constrained and controlled by carefully
integrated wiring and avionic and structure design.

4.2 AIRCRAFT PROTECTION

4.2.1 Shielding and Ground Reference

Aircraft and circuit protection is formed in a layered design: 1st layer, structural shielding,
liners, trays, overbraid; 2nd layer, circuit shield; 3rd, balanced, isolated circuit; 4th, voltage,
current limiting; and 5th, software.

Double shielding (two layers of shielding) fends off lightning and radio frequencies. There is
just no getting around it-for critical circuits having exposed wiring, double shielding is
necessary.

97
Structure, skin, and panels of the aircraft form the first major level of shielding, and it is the
system level barrier. Fuselage shielding is extended into open sections or unshielded areas,
such as leading and trailing edge or landing gear, with a cableway, overbraid, or foil (figure
4.2-1).Radio frequencies-electrostatic charge-lightning-safety fault return-ground refer-
ence: all call for a highly conductive material. Liners can be installed in nonmetallic, elec-
tronic bay sections. Where spar, skin, or panel shielding is not inherent in structure, then foil,
metal spray, or metal mesh (figure 4.2-1)can be designed into or onto nonconductive parts.
Leading and trailing edges, engine bays, wheel wells, bulkheads, tail sections: all need evalu-
ation to delineate the shielding and ground planes. Nonconductors, composites, and graphite-
epoxy are not a ground or current return.

The second level or layer of shielding is individual circuit shielding continued (with back-
shells) to the avionics enclosure shield. The second level offers protection against external
threats and internal noise in wiring bundles too. The second level is connected, “grounded,” to
the first level.

Engine Nacelle Electrically

Shielded Bonded
Enclosure Backshell

Paint

Five Layer Design

1. Fuselage or Tray
2. Circuit Shield
3. Balanced Circuit
4. Voltage/Cur rent Limiting
5. Software

Figure 4.2-1 Layered Design

98
4.2.2 Apertures and Electrical Bonding

Conductive panels, foil, or paint form and continue the shielding enclosure on skin panels and
trays and, unless electrically bonded, will develop harmful voltages or electrostatic charge
centers. (See excellent reports in bibliography by L. 0. Hoeft on shielding and aperture losses.)
Often good continuity is provided by fasteners. External items are electrically bonded and
grounded to provide static discharge paths. Conductive paint is applied to external nonconduc-
tive surfaces.

Everything is searched out to check resistance.

Materials: titanium, steel, stainless steel, aluminum alloys, fiber glass, graphite-epoxy,
Kevlgr, phospher bronze, composites
Parts: instrument panels, keyboards, switching panels, seats, frames, window films or
mesh, quick access doors, skin panels, cowls, fairings, trays, overbraid, backshells,
plumbing, brackets, covers, control surfaces
Liners: foil, mesh, plating, depositions
Finishes: alodine, anodize, iridite, organic applications, copper plating, tin, silver, nickel
Sealants: paint, film, special substances

Bonding is detail work and often research and development is needed on new materials and
techniques. Materials and procedures are recorded in a bonding and corrosion prevention
document.

4.2.3 External Wiring Interface Circuits

Long wiring runs extending out to the wing and to the engines are unintentional antennas
that collect noise. Data, control, and sensor lines, outside of the shielding of the fuselage,
demand protection against radio frequencies impinging on engine struts or mounts, leading
and trailing edges, and landing gear.

Engine instruments, pressure, temperature, speed, thrust control, air data, fire, flight control
computers (circuits for actuators and control surfaces), proximity switches, position indicators,
temperatures, and braking circuits are candidates for analysis and protection. Circuits are
categorized by criticality. Line replaceable units may number from 50 to 100 units and digital
buses, 200 to 300, but the buses will reduce to 30 or so different types with only 5 or 10 types
being external to the fuselage. Future systems may have less than 10 digital buses. Discrete
circuits number 30 or 40 different types, with around 10 external. They can be thoroughly
analyzed.

Good rules for external circuits (there are exceptions):

Grounding:
Circuits isolated from structure at exposed end
EM1 tests applied to returndgrounds of units not on a ground plane
Primary to secondary power isolated

99
Bonding:
Case bonded to ground plane (when circuits isolated from case)
Case isolated from ground plane (when circuits grounded to case)
BackshelUconnector bonded to case

Shielding:
Double shielding installed on transmitter lines
Internal shield grounded internally
External shield grounded externally (to backshell)

Input/output :
Interface circuits balanced; clock and data signals routed together
Interface circuits isolated: transformer, LEDs, fiber optics
High resistance (greater than 10 kQ) designed into circuits
All circuits filtered
No shared power wire returns
Wiring/packaging:
Return wire twisted with signal wire
No wires installed across an aperture (apertures bonded)
Line drivers/receivers packaged close to connector
Connectors on equipment case placed in one local area

4.2.4 Circuit Protection

Protection depends upon electronics design, packaging and, especially for external wiring, the
voltage stress conditions: stress on insulation, thin films, integrated circuits, and trace spac-
ing. Solenoids and motors with heavy insulation and no electronics usually do not require
protection. Thin film and integrated circuits do. (See comprehensive reports in bibliography by
R. L. Carney, R. A. McConnell, and D. L. Sommer for excellent treatment of protection de-
vices.)

Every interface circuit needs analysis and voltage/current limiting. Naturally, the transient
or radio frequency threat must be known; first define the open circuit voltage; second the
surge or characteristic impedance of the wiring and the input impedance of the input capaci-
tor, resistor, or diode; then determine short circuit current; and finally the transient time and
energy, or radio frequency power. The following are variable, but important, voltage withstand
requirements or test levels that apply to insulations, parts, and electronics and are usable
benchmarks.

No protection usually required:

1500V rms, 2100V peak, 400-Hzsignal, impressed for one minute; this is the voltage
withstand specification for insulation (solenoids, motors)

100
 3000V or greater, one microsecond transient withstand for insulation, varies with humid-
ity,.configuration, altitude, time
1500V, one microsecond transient, discrete resistor (molded part)
1500V, fiReen mil circuit card spacing (at sea level)

Protection required:
200V or less, thin film, transient withstand voltage
200 to 800V, receivers protected by integrated circuit diodes
lOOV, transistors
30V or less, operational amplifier receiver
360V or less, fifteen mil circuit card trace spacing, at 100,000 ft
360V or less, corona initiation at 100,000 ft, varies with shape

The five layers of protection: 1) structural shielding, overbraid, cableway, 2) circuit shields, 3)
balanced, isolated circuit, 4) voltage/current limiting, and 5) software combined with a stable
ground reference plane help to guarantee compatibility.

4.3 TRADES
It is critical to first know program design requirements-and the environment. Dissect the
electromagnetic topology of the aircraft including digital transmission, power system, an-
tenna fields. Round up new and off-the-shelf equipment and bay locations. Search out aircraft
structural and skin panel materials. Define the exposed critical circuits and equipment.

1st Major Trade: Location of equipment, categories, and tailoring of electromagnetic compati-
bility requirements of each unit. The wiring and the equipment is kept shielded under alumi-
num or graphite-epoxy and away from radio frequency fields (figure 4.3-1). Units of a
subsystem colocated in a protected environment may have the design/test levels eased: low-
ered for susceptibility, raised for emission. Units not on the wing will not experience resonant
conditions. Off-the-shelf equipment is often unchangeable at the inputloutput interface, and if
located internally may save on shielding or externally mounted filters.

2nd Major Trade: Wire length and separation. Shortened wiring or elimination of wiring.
Equipment location, equipment combination, wiring deletion, are waiting for evaluation, for
example: on-engine electronics supplied with on- engine power; major interfacing units physi-
cally located close together. Noise amplitude is proportional to length. Metallic wiring may be
replaced with fiber optics to save tens to hundreds of pounds and 25% to 50% reduction of
wires (figure 4.3-2) and major reduction of EMI.

3rd Major Trade: Digital, balanced, isolated circuits versus analog circuits and single-ended or
discrete circuits. Delete or reduce open wiring. Reduction of wiring, shielding, transformers,
power, weight through use of multiplexed digital bus (figure 4.3-3).

4th Major Trade: The five levels of layered protection. If structure shielding not available,
then trade cableway versus overbraid versus exposed wiring with filter/voltage/current limit-
ing. For one or two wires on noncritical circuit, filter may trade off better than overbraid or
cableway.

101
 1v I 1 V/,m RF Field :Reference 1
100 rnV
10 rnV
1 mV
100 pV
10 pv

100 nV
10 nV
10 100 1 10 100 1 10
KHz MHz GHz
Frequency
INDUCED VOLTAGE

lofi*fi
1 Pa
10Hz lWHz 1 KHz 10KHz 100 KHz 1 MHz 10MHz 100 MHz
Analyze lor Added
Shielding Requirements
Such as Foil

Frequency

RESONANCE

t
SHIELDING
Landing Gear Doors

1ov
1v \ ,
1-Vlm RF Field Reference I l-V/m RF Field Reference
I I I I/

-loOoT 180
61/$4 g:y
Maximum Limit
Measured
Near High-
100 n v l i l Power Broadcast
10 nV VHF
10 100 1 10 100 1 10 3 2 0
KHz MHz GHz
Frequency Survey
l00m to
> 500m L Factory
Distance
7
Land
Installations
MH-235

FM-VHF
Rural
SWITCHING COMPUTER
REGULATORS CLOCKIOATA L
e
ve
N
-
J.

RADAR

FIELDS

Figure 4.3-1 Tade-€quiprnent Location

102
- MAGNETIC FIELDS

lmm 10mm 1Wmm 1M 10M 1WM

0 Win 0 4 in 4 in 40 in

0.1 1 10 0.05 0.1 0.2 1 10 100 loo0

ProbaMility Microseconds

SEPARATE SIGNAL FROM POWER FEEDERS

Figure 4.3-2 Fade- Wire LengthSeparation

103
 HIGH VOLTAGE
Voltage-Peak Current-Peak
Open Circuit 10 kV Shon Circuit
10 kVi I 1 1

&
1 kV 1 kA

STAT1C
1WV 1OOA

1ov 10A
LIGHTNING

f 100 mV
1v

Sine Wave or Transient

1A

100 mA

/ I n

DIGITAL " T I T \
I TOLERANCE
Voltage Current
10 100
Kilovolts Ampere

-
Threshold

Volt6
10
Damage Milliampere
l T L UDset Threshold
I -

Millivolts Mhz lo 100s MHz MHz lo 100s MHz

Figure 4.3-3 Tade-Digital Circuits

104
A recent large program relied on the fuselage for the major portion of circuit shielding.
Wheelwells, engine bays, outer wing sections, and radome areas were shielded. Quick access
often is necessary. Overbraid (20% of the bundles) was installed for critical flight control
circuits to “extend” the airframe. It was indicated that in that design the use of metal over-
braid on all bundles might be 10 times heavier than reliance on the fuselage. Also, complexity
of the topology limited the use of overbraid, and in certain areas a combination of protection
was needed. For circuits inside the fuselage, filter pins were used; for outside circuits, voltage
limiters. Discrete filters for each circuit were not pursued because of excessive volume and
weight.

If it is at all possible to install a cableway, tray or liner, it may be better in the long run.
Consider these facts in favor of a tray:

Design:
0 Proven designs/models and inservice experience
Easily formed, integrated with structure
0 Fewer electronics and “sneak paths”
Freedom from reliability studies

Protection:
0 Line replaceable units installed with known protection
Freedom from frail electronics
Excludes high voltages and arcs
Rugged and durable

Test:
0 Lower test levels on electronics
0 Freedom from complex verifications

Life cycle cost:

Reduced engineering, part control, troubleshooting, maintenance
0 Easy inservice monitoring
Long life

Computerized design procedures will speed the capability to make trades.

105
 5.0 ACTIVITIES AND DOCUMENTS

5.1 SPECIFICATIONS/DOCUMENTS

Some have postulated that most of the electromagnetic compatibility designs and trades at the
airframe manufacturer’s level must be quickly accomplished before go-ahead or at least at the
very beginning of the program, that is: all of the major specifications must be set up-the
equipment located and categorized- the environment documented-procurements contracted.

This may not, however, be as extensive an effort as it sounds because most specifications for
environments and existing technologies are already available from other programs and need
only to be reworked, shaped, and adapted.

Specifications set guidelines-standards-requirements. They are the foundation for any pro-
gram, and a path that provides a reference and continuity. They help bypass unproductive
squabbles and unnecessary changes. They sidestep duplication: “reinventing the wheel.” They
even help tie into the next program.

From the top documents, which outline the intent and scope, down to the lower tier designs,
look for these specifications:

Industry:
FAA Code of Federal Regulations, Aeronautics and Space #14, Parts 1-59; Part 25 Air-
worthiness Standards: Transport category Airplanes, reference 26.1309, 25.1353, and
25.1431; Part 23 Rotorcraft, 23.1309; Part 27 General Aviation, 27.1309.
RTCA/DO-l6OB “Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equip-
ment,” July 20, 1984, Sections 1to 3, and 15 to 22.
(A generic industry system specification here would be appropriate.)

Program:
“Program System Specification”: Simple one or two paragraph delineation of top EMC
references, generic system requirements, or scope.
“System Electromagnetic Compatibility Design Requirements”: Organized sections of
system and aircraft program requirements for external environment, equipment catego-
ries, interface circuit policy, grounding, bonding, shielding, wiring, isolation, electrostat-
ics, aircraft shield policy, special analyses, applicable EMC document list, and policy for
critical equipment.
“Equipment Electromagnetic Environmental Requirements Specification”: Explicit
equipment level design and test requirements including test setup and conditions-
patterned after the industry standard DO-160.
All Procurement Specifications: Reference in the design section to the “Equipment Elec-
tromagnetic Environmental Requirements Specification.” List of deviations. Require-
ments for power, dielectrics, circuit interfaces, grounding, bonding, shielding. ‘Igble of
tests. Statement of Work: Developmental analysis and breadboard test report, analysis of
off-the-shelf equipment, technical exchange meetings, qualification test plan and report.

107
 Design HandbooWGuidelinesDesign Notes: Interpretation and conversion of program de-
sign and test requirements into protection techniques.
System Test Plan: Test policy and outline. Subsystem tests. Aircraft tests: ground test,
environment test, electrical bonding measurements, power switching test, flight test.

Related specifications:
“Power and Electrical Requirements Specification”: Aircraft and external ground power
quality, returns and grounding design
“Wiring and Shielding Design and Manufacturing Procedure”: Wire separation, shield
construction
“Electrical Bonding and Corrosion Prevention”: Materials, compatibility, fasteners, sur-
face preparation, joining and sealing

5.2 TASKS/ACTIVITIES

At the beginning of the program, some participants think immediately of the analytical tasks
and modeling. Some think of staffing, and organization, and people. Others think of schedules.
The EMC engineer must pursue the design; he thinks of what the new aircraft is: new materi-
als, new equipment, old equipment, size, layout, wiring runs. Defining the aircraft for electro-
magnetic compatibility is a monumental effort. The effort cannot be delayed. It must be done
quickly. Some details will not be available. There are roadblocks, but these are the engineer-
ing tasks.
Identify in a table or spreadsheet all equipment: new and off the shelf; inhouse and
vendor; supplying agency; purchasing specification number. List the equipment versus
applicable EMC requirements (including outmoded EMC limits), deviations, waivers, and
approvals.
Assess aircraft and equipment architecture: flight deck, electronic bays, externally
mounted units, engine units, power and signal circuitry. Identify each equipment and
installation and focus on grounding, bonding, shielding, materials and wiring.
Set up electromagnetic compatibility design categories/groups.
Track down procurement specifications: remove or add limits and EMC interfaces; estab-
lish the developmental, engineering model, qualification, and acceptance tests; communi-
cate with Procurement, Project, and the subcontractor.
Define topology, field patterns, power of transmitters, and dig out the receiver thresholds.
Extract power system type, power quality, ground returns and ground points.
Chase down aircraft advanced technologies and materials. Unearth the differences from
past programs.
Dissect the new environments, external and internal, that are different from DO-160.
Document new test equipment needs.

With the aircraft definition in hand, the electromagnetic compatibility engineer can take each
of the EMC program documents and cut and fit them together: no overlap, no deficiencies, just
acceptable coverage. He tailors the requirements based on: 1) past experience, 2) new environ-

108
ments and technologies 3) equipment location, 4) critical circuits, 5 ) weight, volume, and 6)
test. Important: aircraft specifications are finalized more easily before formal design release
has been invoked.

Analysis can’t wait. Analysis and models feed on physical dimensions: fuselage-wing-
landing gear, length, width, height; and electrical parameters: resistance, capacitance, induc-
tance. Computer models are bringing new capabilities for quick evaluation of multiple design
alternatives, and keyboard editing speeds the rapid reevaluation and turnaround when
changes are proposed.

The apertures, seams, wire routing, overbraid, isolation, and the shielding effectiveness of
aluminum, titanium, graphite-epoxy, steel must be known along with interface protective
designs that must be pulled out of the schematics: filter pins, discrete filters, balanced circuits,
transformer isolators, fiber optics. Getting a n early handle on these items expedites the many
wire coupling and radiation analyses of common noise sources, for instance: power frequencies
and ripple; pulse width modulated power; transients from solenoids, valves, motors; and clock
oscillator harmonics.

Just a word about responsibility. The electromagnetic compatibility engineer is usually re-
sponsible for either a system and product or, conversely, for a technology or even a combina-
tion of both. Becoming knowledgeable in a technology area is often the best. For example, for
technology:
Computerddigital circuits, software
Radio frequency transmitters, receivers, antennas
Power quality, generators, switching regulators
Analog instrumentation, transducers, sensors, fiber optics
Grounding/bonding/shielding/wiring/packaging
Dielectrics, corona, and materials

And for example, product or system:

Environmental control and cargo (power)
Flight control/management (digital/software)
Communicatiordnavigation(radio frequencies)
Power and lighting and fuel
Air data, flight instruments (video, analog, CRTs, displays)

The definition and specification of electromagnetic compatibility on an airplane program is a

sporty task. It must be initiated early. Most airplane programs need at least three engineers;
future programs with advanced avionics and flight control systems may require four or five.

109
 6.0 EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION

6.1 NEW AND EXISTING

The countdown is on until the specifications on every last unit of new and existing equipment
are found, cut apart, organized, and set straight. Equipment “procurement specifications” are
the bottom line. They define design and test requirements and waivers or deviations. If a unit
meets its tailored, allocated electromagnetic compatibility specifications, then electromag-
netic compatibility on the aircraft is almost always assured. Deliberate on and wring out
every last detail:
‘hilored requirements for the each unit (per RTCA/DO-lGOB)
Each bonding/grounding/shieldinginterface (between the supplier and airframe manu-
facturer)
Power quality specific requirements
Dielectric voltage withstand levels
Circuit interface wiring design
Detailed unit tests: developmental, engineering model, qualification, acceptance

The specifications on new and existing units give exact requirements, item by item, on electri-
cal and physical parameters and tolerances.

Existing equipment has already proven itself with its “inservice history,” and treatment is
different from new equipment. Existing equipment is addressed with attention to conformance
to past specifications and any new program requirements. On a new program, old require-
ments may not be adequate: transients may need redefinition and reapplication depending on
unit location; electric field protection may need to be increased; radio frequency susceptibility
tests may need strengthening; and power bus momentary interruptions may be a problem.
Development tests cannot be overemphasized for new and even existing units. The policy is
“make it upset” in order to find margins. Development tests are important and are a major
element of successful programs. EM1 protection cannot be competently added after the final-
ized design.

At some point the packaging engineer and circuit designer at the supplier have to know what
the overall design policy is for new and old equipment, and what their interface design is
going to be. Key design requirements may be spread about in various documents, but should
be either in a system specification or in the equipment procurement specification. Policies or
requirements vary from program to program, product to product; these are some standards:

Grounding:
Designed, controlled, equipotential ground plane system
Optional digital circuit ground to case
No analog (audio) circuit ground to case without approval
Primary to secondary power isolation (transformer electrostatic shield)
Power single point ground system; “star” architecture

111
 No power current in nonmetallic structure
EM1 requirements apply to returns/grounds of units not on ground plane

Bonding:
Case bonded directly to ground plane or
Connector pin for case ground wire
BackshelVconnector bonded to case

Shielding:
Internal shield grounded internally
External shield grounded externally (to backshell)
Shields grounded at both ends (except analog)
No circuit current on shield (except coax)
Double shield on transmitter lines

InputJoutput circuits:
Interface circuits balanced; clock and data signals routed together
Interface circuits isolated; transformer, LED, fiber optics
Increased circuit power ratings at outputs
Return wires run twisted with the signal wires
Connector pin for circuit ground
Connector pin for case ground or fault wire
Voltage/current limit all interface circuits
No shared power returns

Packaging:
Separatiodisolation of power from signal
Power, signal, and ground returns on separate pins
Line driverdreceivers close to the connector
High-frequency circuits close to the connector
Low-frequency circuits at back of the box
Connectors on equipment case placed in one local area

6.2 AIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT CATEGORIES

Category definition needs immediate attention. Avionics must not be over or under designed.
Equipment categories represent the modification and tailoring of DO-160 requirements to
units of equipment having widely variant properties or environment:
Computers, power generators, transducers, motors

112
 Units with extra long interface wiring
Units placed on or off the aircraft ground plane
Equipment exposed or not exposed to high-energy radio frequency

Here are some typical categories:

Category 1A:
Energy storage devices (having no electronics): inductors, valves, motors, solenoids, and relays
switched continuously or automatically. The items in this category are designed and tested to
conducted emission and radiated emission requirements only. They do not require susceptibil-
ity tests.

Category 1B:
Energy storage devices operating on an intermittent basis, less than once every three min-
utes. The conducted emission and radiated emission requirements are raised (relaxed) 20 dB.

Category 1C:
Energy storage devices having short duration transients and operating two times or less per
flight. Emission and susceptibility requirements are waived.

Category 2A:
Electricallelectronic equipment: avionics, power equipment, any unit having electronics lo-
cated within the fuselage and protected by the fuselage metallic structure. All of the standard
equipment electromagnetic compatibility requirements, equivalent to DO-160, apply: con-
ducted emission, radiated emission, conducted susceptibility, radiated susceptibility.

Category 2B:
Electricallelectronic equipment within the fuselage, but having long wiring runs, over 100 ft.
All standard requirements apply along with a raised (possibly 3 dB)400-Hzelectridmagnetic
field and radio frequency field tests.

Category 2C:
Transmittersheceivers: All standard requirements, and with antenna terminal conducted
emission and susceptibility tests added.

Category 3A.
Electricallelectronic equipment outside the fuselage and well shielded, but exposed to higher
lightning induced transient activity. All standard requirements plus lightning induced tran-
sient requirements.

Category 3B:
Electricallelectronic equipment unshielded under nonconductive material or on external
mountings. All standard requirements apply and lightning plus increased radio frequency
susceptibility test levels (possibly 100 V/m).

113
 Category 3C:
EledricaVelectronic equipment not on a ground plane. All standard requirements apply and
susceptibility and emission requirements are also applied to the equipment circuit ground,
power ground, and case ground interface wires.

Category 4:
Support equipment associated with the aircraft. Apply radiated emission and conducted emis-
sion requirements on power that connects to aircraft.

Category 5:
Flight-test equipment: Apply radiated emission requirements and radiated susceptibility re-
quirements for external equipment. Flight equipment is isolated from aircraft circuits.

6.3 SUPPLIERS

Early in the program the EMC engineer hastens to know the supplier (vendor or subcontrac-
tor). It is important to record and establish a file of equipment identification, electrical charac-
teristics and the tailored requirements:
Unit: name, acronym, model, unique identifications
Company: name, location, engineers, organization
Miliated paper: procurement specification, interface control drawing, statement of work,
interface schematics
Unit history: new, existing, modified, previous program usage, inservice experience,
equipment similarities, deviations, waivers
Schedule: technical meetings, prototype/engineering models, test dates, qualification test
procedure
Grounddbonddshields: internal ground, interface bonding
'I& :
development, engineering model, qualification, acceptance
Subsystem: project engineer, staff engineer, contracts engineer

At program startup, there may be specific candidate proposals and subcontractor control plans
or procedures to evaluate. These are important attributes t o look for:
Treatment and awareness of specification requirements
Unit inservice use on previous programs
Past programs experience and success
Evaluation and analysis capabilities
Implementation of design techniques
I Inhouse or provisions for testing facilities

Of course, the size of the program will dictate the extent of the subcontractor effort, but this
might be a typical statement of work:

114
“The subcontractor shall conduct an early investigation and developmental EMC analysis and
test on the breadboard or prototype hardware for new or modified equipment.

A developmental test report and evaluation shall be forwarded to the prime contractor con-
taining information on noise measurements of interface circuits and proposed wiring, protec-
tion, and emission control techniques.

The subcontractor shall obtain available EMC data and inservice history on existing, off-the-
shelf equipment; determine compliance with the program requirements; and, where noncom-
pliant, recommend options for equipment modifications, deviations, or waivers.

The subcontractor shall conduct timely technical exchange meetings and present grounding,
shielding, hardware, and software protection. A qualification test plan and report shall be
submitted for comment and approval.’’

The statement of work for the subcontractor may be more or less detailed depending on com-
plexity and size of the equipment or subsystem.

Subcontractor equipment design changes are made throughout the entire program. An EMC
engineer cannot monitor or assess all engineering changes on all equipment, but a change
involving electrical properties may require some reevaluation or retest. For example, anytime
a change deals with new coupling characteristics, that is: wiring harness rerouting, new
input/output circuits, different circuit board layout, extensive software modifkation that
changes timing sequence or adds new loops, then an analysis or susceptibility retest is appro-
priate. The vendor .maintains complete responsibility and accountability for design and test
verification of his unit or subsystem to fully utilize his own facilities, experience, test equip-
ment and softw&e capabilities.

115
 7.0 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION

7.1 KEY EMC DESIGNS

Verification: Equipment qualification test at a supplier to prove that a design meets specifica-
tion. The qualification test of equipment forms the very keystone of verification.

Verification is also accomplished in the airframe manufacturer’s laboratories to prove perfor-

mance of key EMC designs and properties, such as:
Grounding of digital or analog circuits
Bonding resistance of aircraft part, wire, or joint
Shielding properties of new materials
Leakage of joints and apertures
Emissions of pulse width modulated power
Wiring design and coupling conditions
Aspects of aircraft mounted filters and limiters
Susceptibility thresholds of interface circuits

Verification tests quickly lead to the ultimate proper operation on the aircraft. Measurement
reveals thresholds and noise upset margins. Verifkation lays a groundwork before validation.

Validation: Demonstration of and confidence in proper equipment function along with accept-
able control of noise during aircraft operation in its intended environment.

Demonstration: a two part measurement and test:

1) Operation of an aircraft (or subsystem) through its normal modes while operating equip-
ment and devices, and
2) Introduction of jeopardizing noise environments to stress equipment: all the while moni-
toring functioning flight deck instruments and aircraft circuit operation internally and
externally: internally with built in test circuitdequipment (BITE)and externally with
meters, transient recorders, oscilloscopes, spectrum analyzers, and digital bus analyzers.

An airplane program must be structured on a foundation of solid verification and validation

(see Appendix B).

7.2 VALIDATION PLANS

First, hasten to collect, document, and rely on existing qualification data, existing validated
technologies, and validation by similarity.

Otherwise, validation tests can be run at the subsystem level in a flight avionics laboratory or
on the production aircraft.

When considering subsystem versus aircraft test, assess the following deficiencies and bene-
fits in cost, effectiveness, flexibility, and timeliness:
 COST CAPITAL AllENDANT EQUIPMENT TEST LEARNING
EQUIPMENT PERSONNEL REWORK EQUIPMENT CURVE
Subsystem Very Low Low Low Low Low
Airplane High High High High High

ENVIRONMENT: EQUIPMENT RF SIM- GROUNDS/ RESONANT

COLOCATION ULATION SHIELDS CONDITIONS
Subsystem Poor Good Poor Different
Airplane Actual Good Actual Actual
DESIGN: FINAL FINAL TEST FINAL ENGINEER
HARDWARE SOFIWARE SOFTWARE WIRING AVAILABLE
Subsystem Good Good Excel Fair Good
Airplane Excel Excel Excel Actual Fair

PROCEDURE: APPROVAL FORMAL DECISIONS/ CHANGE PROGRAM

SIGNATURES SEQUENCE DIAGNOSTICS CONTROL TIMING
Subsystem Few No Best Good Fair
Airplane Many Yes Fair Good Late

Table 7.2-
1 Subsystem krsus Aircraft Test

Aircraft offers fidelity, but demands a high price with inflexibility in a dedicated airplane
outfitted with test equipment. The avionics laboratory is an active testing and simulation
facility and testing can oRen be done speedily on a “noninterference” basis when test time is
slack. Circuit access panels already exist. Testing can be easy, informal, flexible and promote
diagnostics and real-time knowledge of noise behavior. A range of tests can be run at the
subsystem level with selected tests on the aircraft.

7.3 VALIDATION PROCEDURE

The subsystem or aircraft configuration, setup, test equipment, and modes are identified and
recorded paragraph by paragraph for each separate mode. The procedure then records step-by-
step operation of equipment.

CONFIGURATION: Model, make, serial numbers, outstanding engineering changes or devia-

tions, wiring or customer configuration, software, test software, test date, location.
I
TEST SETUP Equipment bay lights, test stands, ground planes, shield ties, ground wires,
unique simulations, monitors.

I
TEST EQUIPMENT List by paragraph section test equipment and installation for the follow-
ing systems:
Flight controllflight management: computer breakout boxes, digital bus analyzers,
oscilloscopes
Communicatiodnavigation: interphone electronics breakout boxes, receiver breakout
boxes, interphone headsets, Rl? voltmeters, spectrum analyzer
Power: power supply breakout boxes, chart recorders, transient analyzers, peak reading
(transient) voltmeters

118
 Flight indicatinghecording: flight instrument breakout boxes, digital bus analyzers
Engine: monitors, indicators
Environment: magnetic field measuring instruments, spectrum analyzer and current
probe (wiring) and antennas (radiated emission), signal generators

PERSONNEL: Knowledgeable subsystem or equipment engineers, experienced EMC engi-

neers and technicians. Monitor and record all initial settings, indicator light status, measure-
ment instrumentation, BITE readouts. On functioning displays, observe and record status of
flight instruments, CRT panels on flight deck, left, right, and center control panels, power
panels. During step-by-step procedure, record upsets, circuit breaker disconnects, state
changedevents, autopolot disconnect, warning signaldflags, annunciations, CRT distortion on
all subsystems.

SOFTWARE:Identlfy software installation and initiation for each mode. Automated test soft-
ware routines exercise processing functions and interfaces and monitor the data, status, error
counters, or fault logging in real time or on printout.

MODES OR PRESETS: Establish modes and settings for all systems:

Environmental control: pressurization, temperature, air control
Flight controYmanagement: mode control panel, autopilot engage at “left or right com-
mand”; test software installation, flight management computer; control display unit,
flightpath program, takeoff, cruise, landing, autoland; engine control operation
Communicatiodnavigation: ADF, HF, V”, ATC transmitlreceive frequency modes and
settings, IRS navigation modes, selector panel interphone left and right settings
Power: circuit breakers engageadisengaged
Fuel and hydraulics: pumps, valves
Flight instruments and recorders: flight instrument, cautiodadvisory readouts, recorders
Lighting: light settings, dimmers, strobes
Engine: electronic engine control settings, indicators
Degraded modes: loss of redundant unit, low battery

FUNCTIONAL SWITCHING TEST PROCEDURE: Establish a stepby-step procedure para-

graph for each mode and possibly for each major subsystem. For chosen mode perform “func-
tional switching test.” That is: operate, switch odoff, cycle, or exercise all units:
Environmental control: pressurization, temperature, fans
Flight controvflight management: motors, actuators, flaps, slats
Communicatiodnavigation:HF-VHF transmit
Power: all circuit breakers
Fuel and hydraulics: pumps, valves, solenoids
Flight indicatinghecording: flight instruments, CRTs, recorders
Lighting: cabin, flight deck, strobe, and landing lights
Engine: electronic controls, indicators, actuators, ignitors

119
A subsystem or airplane EMC validation test procedure demonstrates the absence of malfunc-
tion or undesirable noise and authenticates that the repeatability, accuracy, and reality of
operation in normal modes of a n airplane baseline production configuration meets the Federal
Aviation Regulations and the Aircraft System Specification.

ENVIRONMENTAL STRESS TEST PROCEDURE: Establish separate paragraph for each

mode or subsystem as above and operate equipment while introducing transients or radio
frequency energy. The policy is “make it upset” not “show success.’’ If noise is transient, vary
pulse repetition rates relative to computer processing control cycles. Equipment should oper-
ate within performance specification and also demonstrate:
Maintenance of proper internal configuration
Successful automatic restart
Continued operation
No permanent faults
No adverse control surface motion
Automatic transfer to secondary systems

NOISE MEASUREMENT Measure and characterize the signature of noise on the digital data
bus, communication circuits or cables, interphone circuits, powerline bus, analog instrument
circuits, and in the aircraft ambient to assist in validating operation and establishing a data
base for diagnostics, not only for the existing program, but for future programs. Establish a
separate paragraph for each mode. The following are noise types or thresholds:
Clock oscillator harmonics or HF-VHF transmitter signals on circuits and cables
ADF-HF-VHF threshold sensitivity; passenger address circuits, voice recorder, crew in-
terphones noise and thresholds
Powerline switching transients at circuit breakers and equipment terminals, switching
regulator harmonics on buses and on cables
400-Hzelectric and magnetic field strengths, HF-VHF field strengths

BONDING RESISTANCE TEST: Measure resistance of structure joints, skin panels, electro-
static paints, liners, foils, doors, flight deck panels, strut fairings and wing.

Testing and test assessment rests so heavily on a product’s history and the intent of the
product’s function and future use, that it is, of course, a n individual or program responsibility
to define test concepts, requirements and procedures. This validation test information, there-
fore, represents possible guides or techniques, but must be considered as not being appropriate
for a specific test.

7.4 PROGRAM DESIGN REVIEWS

During a program there is no quicker way to help improve the validity and timeliness of the
design and specifications than by periodic reviews to establish agreement on perceived re-
quirements and outcome. The following items are for consideration and might be selected and
presented in a program preliminary design review or critical design review to help lay ground-
work for verification, validation and certification:

120
 Program documentation, organization
Aircraft system and RTCNDO-160 designhest requirements
Environment assessment, equipment EMC categories
Subsystem, equipment architecture/topology
Grounding system plan
Bonding: radio frequency/static/safety
Shielding: aircraft and wiring
Wiring design, critical circuits
New technologies analysis/models
Equipment/subsystedaircraft verificatiodvalidation plan

The prompt review of key documentation and requirements helps to start and keep the pro-
gram on a successful path.

121
 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. A C NO.: 25.13091, “Advisory Circular-Systems Design Analysis,” FAA September 7,

1982.

2. AFSC DH 1 4 , “Air Force EMC Design Handbook,” January 10, 1972.

3. Ahmad, S.,Shielding and Ageing Effects With Flexible Coaxial Cable, 1985 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

4. Annanpalo, Jaakko, EMC Technology, “Common-ModeInterference Rejection in Electri-

cally Short Twisted Pairs,” September 1986.

5. A N S I C95.1-1982, “American National Standard Safety Levels With Respect to Human

Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 300 KiloHertz to 100 GigaHertz.”

6. ARINC 429-8, “Digital Information Transfer System (DITS),”October 31, 1978.

7. Bachman, L., An Assessment of Shipboard Power Line Transients, 1981 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

8. Baker, D.M., 0-18306, “Magnetic and Electrostatic Wire Coupling in the Audio Fre-
quency Range,” The Boeing Company, July 1956.

9. Belden- Wiring and Shielding Data, Beldon Electronic Wire and Cable, Richmond, IN.
47375.

10. Belisle, K. M., EMZ Design Techniques for De-coupling and Isolation of Microcircuits,
1983 IEEE EMC Symposium.

11. Biegon, R., “EMC Characteristics of RS-232Cable Assemblies,” Connection Technology,

January 1986.

12. Birken, J. A., NAVAIR AIR-518-7, “Notebook on Electromagnetic Properties of Compos-

ite Materials Below 1 GHz,” September 1981.

13. Bly, R. P., The Znside and the Outside Are Not the Same-Experimental Znvestigations of
Ground and Shield Topology, 1982 IEEE EMC Symposium.

14. Boaen, V., Designing Logic Circuits for High Noise Immunity, IEEE Spectrum, January
1973.

15. Bodnar, G.D., Shielding Effectiveness Measurements on Conductive Plastics, 1979 IEEE
EMC Symposium.

16. Brettle, J., Electrical Bonding in Aircraft, 1979 IEEE EMC Symposium.

17. Brooks, P.,Physical Design and Electronic Packaging Part 1, EDN, September 5, 1973.
 18. Carney, R. L., Dl80-2742349, Part IV, “Design Guides for Air Vehicles,” February
1987.

19. Chesworth, E. T., EMC Technology, “Electromagnetic Interference Control in Structures

and Buildings,” January-February 1986.

20. Clayton, R. E., Transmission Line Electromagnetic Compatibility, 1975 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

21. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 14, Part 25 Airworthiness Standards, ‘‘Transport
Category Airplanes, Sub Part F Equipment:”
25.1301,Function and Installation
25.1309,Equipment, Systems, and Installations
25.1351,General
25.1353,Electrical Equipment and Installations
25.1431,Electronic Equipment

22. Cowdell, R. B., Simple Equations Compute Radiated Emissions, 1983 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

23. Crawford, M. L., Comparing EM Susceptibility Measurement Results Between Reverber-

ation and Anechoic Chambers, 1985 IEEE EMC Symposium.

24. Creason, R. R., Measurement of the Magnetic Field From Long Two-Wire Lines at Low
Frequencies, 1983 IEEE EMC Symposium.

25. DeMario, W. F., Aerospace America, “New World for Aerospace Composites,” October
1985.

26. Dillon, W.L., Antenna to Antenna Analysis of the E 4 A Advanced Airborne Command
Post, 1974 IEEE EMC Symposium.

27. Ditton, V. R., Coupling to Aerospace Cables at Microwave Frequencies, 1975 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

I 28. Dixon, D. S., Low Frequency Radiated Magnetic Field Emissions: Rationale for a MIL
STD 461B, R E 4 1 Limit Change, 1984 IEEE EMC Symposium.

29. DOD-HDBK-263, “Electrostatic Discharge Control Handbook for Protection of Electri-

cal and Electronic Parts, Assemblies, and Equipment (Excluding Electrically Initiated
Explosive Devices),” May 2, 1980.

30. D6-I 6018 , “Electric Bonding and Grounding Design Requirements,” The Boeing
Company.
I 31. D6-16050-2, “Electromagnetic Interference Control Requirements,” The Boeing
Company.

I 32. Don White Consultants, Inc., DM-5’81, “Syllabus EMC - Design and Measurement for
Control of EMI,” March 9,1981.

124
33. Dubil, E. F., Electrostatic Discharge Special Supplement Douglas Service, Vol. 42, Octo-
ber 1985.

34. Final Environmental Impact Statement for Seattle City Light, Highline 230 KV Trans-
mission Project.

34A. ECAC Study, “A320 Electromagnetic Environment (A320 EME),” by IIT Research In-
stitute, (Contract F19628-85-C-0071prepared for Federal Aviation Administration).

35. Force, R. D., ACT/ControUGuidunce System Study-Volume I , “Integrated Application

of Active Controls W C ) Technology to an Advanced Subsonic Transport Project,”
NASA CR-165963, December 1982.

36. Force, R. D., Report 0180-20186-4, “Investigation of Effects of Electromagnetic Energy

on Advanced Composite Aircraft Structures and Their Associated Avionic/Electrical
Equipment,” September 1977.

37. Gibbons, Randy, Electronic Design, “Performance Analysis Helps Designers Fine Tune
Software,” October 18, 1984.

38. Glancy, Donald, Test and Measurement World, “Preventing EM1 in ATE Systems,” Jan-
uary 1987.

39. Gormady, J., Random Susceptibility of an IC 7400 T T L Nand Gate, 1983 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

40. Hafer, J. W.,The Effects of Shield Grounding llchniques for Isolation to Electromagnetic
Waves, 1981 IEEE EMC Symposium.

41. Hariya, E., Instruments for Measuring the Electromagnetic Shielding Effectiveness, 1984
IEEE EMC Symposium.

42. Hart,A. R., LSI Design Considerations for ESD Protection Structures Related to Process
and Layout Variations, Hewlett Packard Company.

43. Heirman, D. N., Education and Daining of the Industrial Regulatory Compliance Test
n a m , 1981 IEEE EMC Symposium.

44. Hitt, E. F., DOT/FMCTB2-115,“Validation of Digital System Avionics and Flight Con-
trol Applications,” December 1982.

45. Hjellen, G. A., A Thermal Damaged Model for Bi-Polar Semi-Conductors, IEEE EMC
Symposium.

46. Hoeft, L. O., A Simple Theory for Predicting the Electromagnetic Performance of Enclo-
sures, 1985 IEEE EMC Symposium.

47. Hoeft, L. O., Current Division and Shielded Conductive Cables, 1983 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

125
 48. HoeR, L. O., How Big a Hole is Allowable in a Shield, 1986 IEEE EMC Symposium.

49. Hoeft,L. O., Measured Magnetic Field Reduction of Copper Sprayed Wood Panels, 1985
IEEE EMC Symposium.

50. Jarrett, Dick, Electronic Design, “Software Fault ‘Iblerance Staves Off the Errors that
Besiege Microprocessor Systems,” August 9,1984.

i 51. IPC-D317, “Design Standard for Electronic Packaging Utilizing High-speed Tech-
niques,” August 1985.

52. ITEM Interference Technology Engineers’ Master, Robar Industries, Inc., R & B Enter-
prises Division.

53. Kashyap, S., Feed Cable Resonance in a TEM Cell, 1985 IEEE EMC Symposium.

54. Kendall, C. M., DOT/FAA/CT 83/49, “Aircraft Generated Electromagnetic Interference

on Future Electronic Systems,” December 1983.

55. Kendall, C. M., Data Processing Grounding A Need For Circuit Isolation, 1982 IEEE
EMC Symposium.

56. Kendall, C. M.,EMC Control in Mainframe Computing Systems, 1985 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

57. Kendall, C. M., Microfiltering of InputYOutput Cables, 1978 IEEE EMC Symposium.

58. Ketterer, J. R., The Navy F/A-l8A Hornet Electromagnetic Compatibility Program, 1981
IEEE EMC Symposium.

59. Koeritz, K. W., A Systems and Environmental EMC Control Program for the Airtrans
Automated Ground Transportation System, 1974 IEEE EMC Symposium.

60. Larsen, E., IEEE Dunsuctions on EMC, “A Modified Ebers-Moll Transistor Model for
RF Interference Analysis,” November 4, 1979.

61. Larsen, William, Paper No. 84-2605-CP,

6th DASC, “An Overview of the Digital Avion-
ics Assessment Activities Being Conducted by the FAA at NASA-AMES,” December
1984.

62. Larsen, W. E., D. 0.II/FAA/CT84/9, “The Effect of Aircraft Generated Electromagnetic

Interference (EMI) on Future Avionic Systems A Compendium,’’ April 1984.

63. Liao, S. Y.,Light Transmittance and R F Shielding Effectiveness of a Metallic Film Coat-
ing on a Plastic Substrate, 1977 IEEE EMC Symposium. ’

64. Lowe, Ken, Electronic Design, “Noise-margin Analysis Automatically Lays Bare Hid-
den Logic Problems,” October 18,1984.

126
65. Madle, P.J., Cable and Connector Shielding Attenuation and Transfer Impedance Mea-
surements Using Quadraxial and Quintaxial Test Methods, 1975 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

66. March, D. N.,Siting Considerations for Zndustrial Facilities That Generate Environmen-
tal Electromagnetic Noise, 1980 IEEE EMC Symposium.

67. Martin, A. R., Shielding Effectivenessof Long Cables, 1979 IEEE EMC Symposium.

68. McAteer, 0.J., Military ElectronicdCounter-Measures,“Shocking Blow to Military Elec-

tronics,” June 1979.

69. McBrayer, P., R F Compatibility-Environment to Component Part, IEEE EMC

Symposium.

Contract NAS2-12448,“Avionics System Design

69A.McConnell, R. A., DOT/FAA-CT-87/19,
for High Energy Fields.”

70. MZL-HDBK-235-1A , “Electromagnetic (Radiated) Environment Considerations for De-

sign and Procurement of Electrical and Electronic Equipment,” June 23,1972.

71. MZLHDBK35 ( U S A A , “Management and Design Guidance Electromagnetic Radiation

Hardness for Air Launched Ordinance Systems,” January 15, 1981.

72. MZLSTD 461B , “Electromagnetic Emission and Susceptibility Requirements for the
Control of E M , ” April 1, 1980.

73. MIL STD 1250 (MO,“Corrosion, Prevention, and Deterioration Control in Electronic
Components and Assemblies,” March 31, 1967.

74. MIL S T D 1553B, “Digital Databus System.”

75. MIL C 5541A, “Chemical Films and Chemical Film Materials for Aluminum and Alu-
minum Alloys,” March 31, 1964.

76. Morgan, G. E., Examples of System Engineering in the EMP Hardening of Facilities and
Aircrafl, IEEE EMC Symposium, 1983.

77. Morgan, M. Granger, Power Line Fields and Human Health, 1985 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

78. Moser, J. R., ZEEE Transactions on EMC, “Peripheral Cable Shield Termination: The
System EMC Kernal,” February 1986.

79. National Research Council, “Aeronautics Technology Possibilities for 2000: Report of a
Work Shop, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, Commission on Engineering
and Technical Systems,” 1984.

80. Olsen, R. G., A Simple Model for Weakly Coupled Lossy ZYansmission Lines of Finite
Length, 1984 IEEE EMC Symposium.

127
81. Ott, H. W., Digital Circuit Grounding and Interconnection, 1981 IEEE EMC Symposium.

82. Palmgren, C. M., Shielded Flat Cables for EM1 and ESD Reduction, 1981 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

83. Paul, C. R., A f e c t of Pigtails on Coupling to Shielded Wires, 1979 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

84. Paul, C. R., Coupling of Electromagnetic Fields to Tiansmission Lines, 1981 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

85. Paul, C. R., Prediction of Cross %lk in Flat Pack, Coaxial Cables, 1984 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

86. Paul, C. R., Printed Circuit Board Cross n l k , 1985 IEEE EMC Symposium.

87. Paul, C. R., Sensitivity of Multiconductor Cable Coupling to Parameter Variations, 1974
IEEE EMC Symposium.

88. Regan, J. J., Plastics Technology, “ E M Shielding: What You Need to Know And Why,”
January 1980.

89. Rhoades, W. T., Achieving ESD Equipment Protection With Emission Controls, 1985
IEEE EMC Symposium.

90. Rhoades, W. T., Designing Commercial Equipment for Conducted Susceptibility, 1979
IEEE EMC Symposium Records.

91. Rhoades, W. T., Development of Power Main Dansient Protection for Commercial Equip-
ment, 1980 IEEE EMC Symposium.

92. RTCNDO-I GOB, “Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equip
ment,” July 20, 1984.

93. Schneider, L. M., Noise Source Equivalent Circuit Model for Off-line Converters and Its
Use in Input Filter Design, 1983 IEEE EMC Symposium.
94. “Shielding Against Electromagnetic Interference,” Plastics Design Forum, MarcWApril
1979.

95. Shimayama, T., Measurement of the Suppression Characteristic of Filter Network, 1984
IEEE EMC Symposium.

96. Shores, M. W., EMC Language in Perspective, 1981 IEEE EMC Symposium.

97. Small, John, Document (to be issued), “Study of the Non-Damage Effects of Lightning on
Avionics Systems,” The Boeing Company.

98. Sommer, D. L., AFWACTR41-2117, “Protection of Advanced Electrical Power Systems

from Atmospheric Electromagnetic Hazards,” December 1981.

128
 99. Sommer, D. L., D180-27423-17,Part 3, “Atmospheric Electricity Hazards Balanced Pro-
tection Schemes,” September 1984.

100. Strawe, D., Dl 80-18879-1 (AFWCTR-75-141), “Interaction of Advanced Composites

With Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Environment,” September 1975.

101. Tell, R. A., Recent Results on Determining Population Exposure to VHF and UHF Broad-
cast Radiation in the United States, 1979 IEEE EMC Symposium.

102. Tenning, C. B., T6-2408, “Inductive Switching Transients on the KC-135Airplane,” The
Boeing Company, March 1964.

103. Thomas, D. E., Measurements and Calculations of the Cross lblk Due to Capacitive
Coupling Between Connector Pins, 1983 IEEE EMC Symposium.

104. Turner, T. E., Electrostatic Sensitivity of Various Input Protection Networks, Mostek
Corp.

105. Vance, R. D., ITEM 1977, “Magnetic Shielding.’’

106. Violette, M. F., EMC Technology, Vol. 5 , Number 2, “EMI Control in the Design and
Layout of Printed Circuit Boards,” April 1986.

107. Weinstock, G. L., Electromagnetic Integration of Composite Structure in Aircraft,

McDonnell Aircraft Company.

108. Weinstock, G. L., Intra-Vehicle Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis, AFAL-TR-71-

155,Part 1, July 1971.

109. White, D. R. J., Building Attenuation and the Impact on Products Susceptibility, 1974
XEEE EMC Symposium.

110. White, D. R. J., “EM1 Control in the Design of Printed Circuit Boards,” EMC Technol-
ogy, January 1982.

111. White, D. R. J., lbming EMI in Microprocessor Systems, IEEE Spectrum, December
1985.

112. Whittlesey, A. C., Electric Welding Hazard to Spacecraft Electronics, 1981 IEEE EMC
Symposium.

113. Woody, J. A., Modeling Techniques for Discrete Passive Components to Include Parasitic
Effects in EMC Analysis and Design, 1980 IEEE EMC Symposium.

114. Zajac, H., Study of Effects of Electrostatic Discharge on Solid State Devices, Tektronix,
Inc.

115. Zenter, J. C., Aircraft EMC Problems and Their Relationship to Subsystem EMI Require-
ments, ASD, EMC and Power Branch, WPAFB, Ohio, Procedings IEEE, Vol. I, National
Aerospace and Electronics Conference, May 17,1983,Dayton, Ohio.

129
 APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Absorption Loss: Attenuation or retention of electromagnetic energy passing through a mate-

rial, a shield. Absorption loss and reflection loss contribute to total shielding effectiveness
@E>.

Anodize: A preparation by electrolytic process that deposits a protective oxide, insulating film
on a metallic surface (aluminum). The oxide defeats electrical bonding. Alodine and iridite
finishes on aluminum are conductive.

Aperture: An opening, such as a nonconductive panel joint, slot or crack, allowing electromag-
netic energy to pass through a shield.

Audio Frequency (AF): The spectrum (20 to 20,000 Hz)of human hearing, often defined as
extending from approximately 20 Hz to 50 kHz and sometimes to 150 kHz. Audio noise is
nuisance hum, static, or tones from powerline 400 Hz,switching regulator and digital clock
harmonics, or HF,VHF transmitter frequencies.

Backshell: Metal shell connecting circuit shields or overbraid to an electrical connector.

Balanced Circuit: A signal, acting line to line, between two conductors having symmetrical
voltages identical and equal in relation to other circuits and to ground. “Differential mode” is
line to line; “common mode” is line to ground.

Bandwidth (BW): Frequencies bounded by a n upper and lower limit in a given band associated
with electronic devices, filters, and receivers.

Bond, Electrical: Electrical connection at two metallic surfaces securely joined to assure good
conductivity often 2.5-mQ maximum for electrical/electronic units and 1R for electrostatic dis-
sipation or safety. A “faying surface” bond maintains contact between relatively large or long
surfaces. Inherently bonded parts are permanently assembled and conductivity exists without
special preparation: such as with welding, brazing.

Braid, overbraid: Fine metallic conductors woven to form a flexible conduit or cableway and
installed around insulated wires to provide protection against electric fields and radio fre-
quencies. Best when peripherally connected to backshells. A grounding strap/jumper may be
made of braid.

Cable or harness: A bundle of separate, insulated, electrical circuits, shielded or unshielded,

usually long and flexible and having breakouts, terminations, overbraid, and mounting provi-
sions completely assembled.

Cableway: A solid metallic housing (liner, foil, coating) surrounding and shielding insulated
electrical conductors. Also called conduit, tray, or raceway. Crosswise or transverse openings
or breaks in the metallic cableway cause noise voltages to be transferred to internal wire
circuits.

PFiECEDlNG PAGE BLANK NOT FILNIU) 131

Common Mode (CM) Impedance: Impedance or resistance shared by two or more circuits so
that noise voltages/currents generated by one are impressed on the others.

Common Mode Rejection: The ability of wiring or an electronic device to reject common mode
(line-to-ground) signals and maintain fidelity of differential mode (line-to-line) signals.

Common Mode Signal: Identical and equal signals on input conductors or at the terminals of a
device relative to ground.

Conducted Emission (CE) or Interference: Voltage/current noise signals entering or leaving a

unit on interface conductors-emission is the general term, interference is undesired noise.

‘Coupling: The transfer of energy between wires or components of a circuit electrostatically,

electromagnetically, or directly.

Cross Coupling (Crosstalk): Transfer of signals from one channel, circuit, or conductor to an-
other as a n undesired or nuisance signal or the resulting noise.

Damage: The irreversible failure of a component.

Decibel (dB): Decibel expresses the ratio between two amounts of power, P1 and P2, at two
separate points in a circuit. By definition, the number of dB = 10 log t o the base 10 of (PlE’2).
For special cases, when a standard power level P2 = 1 mW or 1 W or 1 kW, then the ratio is
defined as “dBm,” “dBw,” or “dBKW.” Moreover, because P = V2/R and also 12/R, decibels
express voltage and current ratios. Ideally, the voltages and currents are measured at two
points having identical impedances. By definition, dB = 20 log V1N2 and dB = log 11/12. For
convenience, V2 or I2 are often chosen as 1 pV or 1 pA and the ratio is defined as dB above a
pV or dB above a pA when graphing emission or susceptibility limits.

Dielectric Strength: Voltage withstand capability that a n insulating material sustains before
destructive arcing and current flow, usually expressed in volts per mil thickness. Dielectric
withstand voltage is the voltage level at which insulation breakdown occurs.

Differential Mode (DM) signal: The signal in a two wire circuit measured from line to line.

Dual Ground: Equipment case groundheturn through two independent circuit paths to struc-
ture implemented in flammable zones and water leakage areas- each path meeting electrical
conductivity (resistance) requirements.

Electric Field: High-impedance, radiated voltage field, positive or negative, from a voltage
source as contrasted to a low-impedance magnetic field from a current source.

Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC): Operation within performance specification in the in-

tended electromagnetic interference environment.

Electromagnetic Interference (EMI): Conducted and radiated voltage/current noise signals,

broadband (BB) or narrowband (NB), that degrade the specified performance of equipment.

Electrostatic Charge: Electric potential energy with a surrounding electric field, uniform or
nonuniform, moving or at rest, on a material.

132
Emission: Voltage/current noise on a wire or in space. Broadband emission has uniform spec-
tral energy over a wide frequency range and can be identified by the response of a measuring
receiver not varying when tuned over several receiver “bandwidths.” Or, energy present over
a bandwidth greater than the resolution bandwidth where individual spectral components
cannot be resolved. Broadband (BB) may be of two types: 1)impulse and coherent varies 20 dB
per decade of bandwidth and 2) random or statistical, varies 10 dB per decade. A narrowband
(NB) emission or signal, sometimes called continuous wave, occurs at a discrete frequency and
does not vary with bandwidth.

Fault Current: The maximum current (magnitude and duration) flowing through a fault
point-equal to the supply voltage divided by the dc resistance of powerline leads, circuit
breakers, and the current return in wire or structure.

Filtering: Device or unit that passes or rejects a frequency band and designed to block noise
from entering or leaving a circuit or unit.

Ground: A generic term having multiple meanings and indicating a circuit return path or a
voltage reference: not “zero” voltage reference. Four-hundred millivolts of noise voltage is
common on “quiet” grounds. There are several types of returns and references.

Return:
Structure, for power, fault, and “discrete” circuits
A grid of wires, solid sheet, or foil
A wire from circuit load back to source or to case
Circuit card “ground plane,” also a reference and shield

Reference:
Structure, for electronics, shields, power
A grid of wires, solid sheet, or foil
A wire from circuit to grounding block or case
A wire from circuit to structure
Shield tie
Earth

Immunity: Capability of a circuit or unit to operate within performance specification in a

specified electromagnetic interference environment.

Isolation: Electrical separation and insulation of circuits from ground and other circuits or
arrangement of parts to provide protection and prevention of uncontrolled electrical contact.

Jumpedstrap: A short wire, strip, strap, or braid conductor installed to make a safety ground
connection, to dissipate electrostatic charge, or establish continuity around a break in a cir-
cuit.

133
Limiting, VoltageKurrent: Semiconductor components, diodes, Transorb, or filter designed to
clip and shunt to ground a n applied transient or steady- state voltage. Used to protect against
noise frequencies, faults, lightning, and inductive switching transients.

Magnetic field: A radiated, low-impedance field having lines of “flux” or magnetomotive force
associated with an electrical current.

Malfunction: Failure or degradation in performance that compromises flight safety.

Noise: Conducted or radiated emission causing circuit upset, performance disorder, or unde-
sired sound.

FYecipitation.static (P-static): Electrostatic discharge, corona, arcing, and streamering, steady

state or impulsive, causing circuit upset, receiver noise or component damage.

Radiated emission (RE): Electromagnetic energy transmitted and propagated in space usually
considered as audio frequency or radio frequency noise.

Radio frequency (RF): Frequencies in the electromagnetic spectrum used for radio communica-
tions extending from kilohertz to gigahertz.

Radio frequency interference (RFI): Electromagnetic interference in the radio frequency

range.

Sealant: An applied substance enclosing and protecting the integrity of a joint, fastener, or
electrical bond from moisture, contaminants, oxidation, and acid or alkaline corrosion.

Shield: A conductive material, opaque to electromagnetic energy, for confining or repelling

electromagnetic fields . A structure, skin panel, case, cover, liner, foil, coating, braid, or cable-
way that reduces electric and magnetic fields into or out of circuits or prevents accidental
contact with hazardous voltages.

Shield effectiveness (SE): The ability of a shield to reject electromagnetic fields. A measure of
attenuation in field strength at a point in space caused by the insertion of a shield between the
source and the point.

Signal return: A wire conductor between a load and the signal or driving source. Structure can
be a signal and power return. Commonly, it is the low voltage side of the closed loop energy
transfer circuit.

Single-ended circuit: A circuit with source and load ends grounded to case and structure and
using structure as return.

Structure: Basic members, supports, spars, stanchions, housing, skin panels, or coverings that
may or may not provide conductive return paths and shields for electrical/electronic circuits.

Susceptibility: Upset behavior or characteristic response of an equipment when subjected to

specified electromagnetic energy-identified with the point, threshold, or onset of operation
outside of performance limits. Conducted Susceptibility (CS) applies to energy on interface
conductors; Radiated Susceptibility (RS) to radiated fields.

134
Threshold, noise: The lowest electromagnetic interference signal level that produces onset of
susceptibility.

Upset: Temporary interruption of performance that is self-correcting or reversible by manual

or automatic process.

Unacceptable Response: Upset, degradation of performance, or failure, not designated a mal-

function, but is detrimental or compromising to cost, schedule, comfort, or workload.

Undesirable response: Change of performance and output, not designated a malfunction or

safety hazard, that is evaluated as acceptable as is because of minimum nuisance effects and
excessive cost burdens to correct.

Validation: Demonstration and authentication that a final product operates in all modes and
performs consistently and successfully under all actual operational and environmental condi-
tions founded upon conformance to the applicable specifications.

Verification: Demonstration by similarity, previous inservice experience, analysis, measure-

ment, or operation that the performance, characteristics, or parameters of equipment and
parts demonstrate accuracy, show the quality of being repeatable, and meet or are acceptable
under applicable specifications.

135
 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AJC Aircraft
ACARS ARINC Communications Addressing and Reporting System
ACT Active Controls Tkchnology
ADC Air Data Computer
AF Audio Frequency
ADF Automatic Direction Finder
AFCS Automatic Flight Control System
APU Auxiliary Power Unit
ARINC Aeronautical Radio Inc.
BB Broadband
BITE Built-In Test Equipment
BW Bandwidth
CDU Control Display Unit
CE Conducted Emission
CM Common Mode
CRT Cathode Ray Tube
cs Conducted Susceptibility
DFDAU Digital Flight Data Acquisition Unit
DFDR Digital Flight Data Recorder
DITS Digital Information Transfer System
DM Differential Mode
DME Distance Measuring Equipment
E3 Electromagnetic Environmental Effects
EADI Electronic Attitude Director Indicator
ECAC Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center
ECS Environmental Control System
E/E ElectricaVElectronic
EEC Electronic Engine Control
EED Electro-Explosive Device
E-FIELD Electric Field
EFIS Electronic Flight Instrument System
EGT Exhaust Gas Temperature
EHSI Electronic Horizontal Situation Indicator
EICAS Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System
EM Electromagnetic
EMC Electromagnetic Compatibility
EME Electromagnetic Effects
EMI Electromagnetic Interference
EMIC Electromagnetic Interference/Compatibility
EMP Electromagnetic Pulse
EPR Engine Pressure Ratio
ESD Electrostatic Discharge
ESE Electric (field) Shield Effectiveness
FCC Flight Control Computer
FDEP Flight Data Entry Panel
FMC Flight Management Computer
GrEp GraphiteEpoxy
GPS Global Positioning System

137
 GPWS Ground Proximity Warning System
HF High Frequency
H-FIELD Magnetic Field
W C Integrated Application of Active Controls Technology (to a n Advanced Subsonic
Transport Project)
IDG Integrated Drive Generator
ILS Instrument Landing System
INS Inertial Navigation System
IRS Inertial Reference System
LCC Life Cycle Cost
LOC Localizer
LRRA Low Range Radio Altimeter
LRU Line Replaceable Unit
MCDP Maintenance Control and Display Panel
MCP Mode Control Panel
mil One thousandths of a n inch (0.001)
MSE Magnetic (field) Shielding Effectiveness
NB Narrowband Signal
N1 Fan Speed
N2 Core Engine Speed
OMEGA Very low frequency navigation
PCU Power Control Unit
PRF Pulse Repetition Frequency
P-Static Precipitation Static
RDMI Radio Distance Magnetic Indicator
I RE Radiated Emission
RF Radio Frequency
RFI Radio Frequency Interference
Rs Radiated Susceptibility
SIA Spectrum Analyzer
I SE Shielding Effectiveness
I SHF Super High Frequency
TLA Thrust Lever Angle
TMC Thrust Management Computer
UHF Ultra High Frequency
VHF Very High Frequency
VLF Very Low Frequency
VOR VHF Omnidirectional Range
VORTAC VHF Omnirange/"hctical Air Navigation
VSI Vertical Speed Indicator
WRU Weapons Replaceable Unit

138
 APPENDIX B

TEST AND TEST LIMITS

Early EMC history h s seen the radio receiver as the centerpiece of electrom gnetic field
testing. It was necessary to find the source of noise entering aircraft audio circuits and radios.
The keys today, in measuring emission and susceptibility parameters, are the oscilloscope and
spectrum analyzer; the need for noise control spread to instrumentation and automatic pilot
circuits.

We are now seeing the need for digital logic analyzers, bus controllers, and automatic, interac-
tive testing capability to measure performance in fly-by-wire, negative stability, aircraft sys-
tems.

Spectrum analyzers and storage oscilloscopes are proven and powerful troubleshooting tools in
the measurement of noise. The scope displays the analog time domain waveform. The spec-
trum analyzer lays out the frequency components of that waveform. The scope shows peak
amplitude. The spectrum analyzer reveals amplitudes versus frequency. With a scope, the
pulse repetition rate is measurable. And with the spectrum analyzer, harmonics are caught in
any frequency band. But, although spectrum analyzers and digitizing oscilloscopes are useful
in finding and characterizing noise, it is ineffective to apply them to the task of detection of
errors or noise margins in computers. The EMC community now needs these units to be paired
with high-speed data bus analyzers and logic analyzers in order to provide even simple mea-
surements of computer processor operations, such as: timing sequence, state activity, and bus
status.

Recently, the processing functions of an avionic computer were upset by noise causing the unit
to suspend operation, to “lock up!’ It then required recycling of power to reinitiate operation.
Personnel from the electromagnetic compatibility group were asked to help diagnose the un-
predictable upsets. An oscilloscope (analog waveforms) and the spectrum analyzer (frequency
components) displayed noise occurring on the wire returns, grounds, and logic power supply
lines; the noise levels were high enough to interfere with clock and data signals; wavering
clock timing pulses destabilized the processing sequences; noise and unstable signals ap-
peared everywhere on the circuit boards traces.

Many days were spent on this problem, but with “analog” instrumentation a solution could
not be found until logic analyzers and bus controllers were brought in. Without the capability
to control data entry formats, observe and evaluate output activity, timing sequences, and to
correlate state changes with noise events, timely solutions to complex problems become
impossible.

Future validation testing on automated aircraft systems will require laboratory personnel to
monitor simultaneously occurring events, to visually correlate timing, logic state changes,
and to automatically record data, decoded and converted, in real time under a number of
aircraft modes. Digital interface bus analyzers, logic analyzers, and interactive computer con-
trollers will offer fast solutions and bring about professional insights to noise problems on new
digital avionics.

139
 Laboratory personnel are called upon to execute a variety of tasks:
Circuit research

I
Test equipment construction
Diagnostics and troubleshooting
Evaluation of avionics performance
Avionics and airplane qualification testing

And laboratory personnel diagnose problems in a variety of aircraft units: computers, power
controllers, transmitterh-eceivers amplifiers, motors/generators, analog sensors, all of which
encompass a wide range of characteristics. Functions of the aircraft, in a flight context, span
the systems of environmental control, flight control, flight management, fuel, communication,
navigation, power, and engine controls, but to the EMC engineer and laboratory technician
these functions bring to mind susceptibilities and emissions:
Power: 400-Hz, dc buses, motors, relays, switching events
Dc-to-dc switching regulators, pulse width modulation controllers
Radio frequency receiver thresholds and transmitter antennas fields
Data transmission and clock oscillators
Sensitive analog (audio) sensors and circuits

Data, information, and histories already exist on environmental levels and are documented in
I
the RTCALDO-lGOB and MIL STD 461 specification (see table Bl).

But, for noise effects on data, transmission and timing sequences relative to conditions of
circuit stability and upset margins, the EMC community today does not have an adequate
data base.

Speeds of future systems will increase, voltage levels will rise, and sensor and receiver thresh-
olds will be lower and more sensitive. Emerging flat panel displays, microprocessor controls,
voice controlled systems, dc power systems, and pulse width modulated, electric actuators will
be available soon for full authority flight controls and will be beyond the reach of engineers in
the EMC community for test and analysis.

In the shield room, the controlled environment and standard electrical references (for in-
stance, voltage, current, impedance, frequency meters, and ground planes) offer established
laboratory conditions for analysis and tradeoffs of digital flight control designs. But, most of
the time during today’s EM1 tests, current probe factors, antenna factors, line losses, attenua-
tion factors, and bandwidth conversions are now essentially hand calculated and joined with
I
raw data almost on a point by point basis in an anachronistic, time consuming process. These
computations are a hindrance, but the more important loss is inability to assess trends and
compare, in real time, circuit operational changes in a controlled and repeatable manner
under various noise levels.

Controlling, probing, comparing, and recording status and data transmissions (being digital in
nature) against the itinerant noise occurrences (having analog waveforms) stands or falls on
the test and simulation capability.

140
Effectiveness resides in the technician’s skill and his experience coupled with the tools and
equipment with which that skill and experience is implemented. New, modern equipment
having automatic microprocessor controls and automatic data readout is becoming available
to provide interactive test decisions. Equipment and tools of the “analog” 1960s and 1970s
cannot carry the load or be compatible with the flight controls of the “full-authority,” “fly-by-
wire” 1990s.

TEST 1606 461B

~~

POWER BUS:
Conducted Emission 21.3a CEO3
Switching Transients CE None CEO7
Conducted Susceptibility (CS):
Audio Frequency CS 18.3 cso1
Radio Frequency CS 20.4a cs02
Power Line Spike 17.3 cso6
Bus Momentary Interruption 16.5.1.4 None
EQUIPMENT AND SIGNAL CABLE:
Conducted Emission Cable 21.3b None
Induced into equipment and cable:
Magnetic “H” Field Equipment 19.3.1 RS02
Magnetic “H” Field Cable 19.3.2 RS02
Transient Spike: 200V None RS02
Electric “E” Field Cable 19.3.3 None
Inductive Switching Transient 19.3.4 None
Radio Frequency CS Cable 20.4b None
EQUIPMENT & INTERCONNECTING CABLE:
Radiated Emission 21.4 RE02
Radiated Susceptibility 20.5 RS03

Table 81 00-16 0 8 and MIL STD 461 B Test Cross Reference

(See Figure 8 1)

141
 POWER LINE CONDUCTED EMISSION
i

In
140-10 140 130 Power Line Limit
130-3 Power Line Limit 130 - E
a ~ ~ 0 Broad
3 Band
-
120 -1 Narrow Band
=5
N
-
120 -1
100-100 98
100 -100
86 a
80110 2 % 80110 CEO7
Transients
Not Exceed 50
*500’0 300 y A/ MH?

9 a f -1 50%
20 -10
I I t I I I I I 1 I 1
-
20 -10
1
Nom Volts
1 I I 1 1 I I I

O i 10 20 100 1 2 10 30 100 O1 1020 100 1 2 10 30 100

150 50 150 50
kHz MHz kHz MHz

CONDUCTED SUSCEPTIBILITY

I-115V rms 400-Hz I

In
E
-
-
In

9
5.75 4
F . 3 . 2
AC System
Power Input
1v rms cso2
500 mV
e
- 28V
DC System
Power Input ,,, ---
100 Millivolts
In
E
In
18.3.1
-.-
. o5 li o 30100 1 io 100 1 10 100 I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1

10 30100 1 10 100 1 2 10 30100 40

750 1.5 15 50 2 30 400 200 1.5 15 50 150 150

&
Hz kHz MHz Hz kHz MHz

Power Input
Transient

DO-
rCS06
2 p sec
10 y sec
sec and
p sec

Note: The “DO-” indicates the RTCAIDO-1606 paragraph.

Figure B1. EM/ Test Limits

142
 SIGNAL INTERCONNECTING CABLES CONDUCTED EMISSION

Signal Line Limit Signal Line Limit

Interconnection Cables Interconnecting Cables
Narrow Band 118 118. Broad Band

73 70
c.
*\ 8 70
21.3 b
---a
3 MNMHz
\ 100pA .
L--+

%
20110
0
2 loo I L
I I I I I I I I l
I
l
1 10 20 100 1 2 10 30 100 1020 100 1 2 10 30 100
150 50 150 50
kHz MHz kHz MHz

INDUCED FIELDS-EQUIPMENT-CABLE

RS02
DO- 20 Amps 400 Hz
19.3.1 and 200V
20 Amps 400 Hz Transient
0.15 Meter From Several Turns
Periphery Wrapped and
7 Taped 7

SIGNAL INTERCONNECTING CABLE

MAGNETIC (“H”) FIELD

RS02-
20 Amplfor
1.5 Meters at 400 Hz

Transient
1

2.51 .8
2 .6

Figure B1. €MI Test Limits (Continued)

143
 INDUCED FIELD-EQUIPMENT-CABLE (CONTINUED)

Relay Transient
Electric Field

380 to 420 Hz 600 Volt Peak-Peak

1800 Volt x Meters 8-10 PPS for 10 sec

(461-None) (461-None)

10- Signal Leads

E Interconnecting Cable

I
m

500 mV

100 0
v) 100 mV
E (461-None)

L I I I 1 I 1 1
I 1 1 1
1 100 1 10 100 1 2 10 30 100
15 150
Hz KHz MHz

RADIATED EMISSION
Rn . i 1201
"-1 I
Narrowband 70 110 Broadband

"1
Field Strength dB p VIM Field Strength dB p VlMlMHz

5 60 100
RE02 92
2 50 rDO-
80

70
21.4

ii
20
t 1.215
Q)

1.215 f
1 I I I I I -cI
10 100
I 1
1
I
10 100
I 1 1 1
1
J
10
1 10 25 100 1 10
15 200
kHz MHz GHz kHz MHz GHz

Figure B1. EM/ Test Limits (Continued)

144
.

RADIATED SUSCEPTIBILITY

2 0 0 r RS03 200VIM Externally

160 100 'Equipment and Interconnecting Cable
1OVlM Field Strength
5VlM
RS03
*Fr2t VIM
DO-
20.5

40k
7- I f 1 I I l l I I I 1
-r

10 100 1 10 35 100 1 10 40
15 1.215
kHz MHz GHz

N
E 10mT 100 GI

800Nm
2
0) 1 mT 10G -
3
.- Radiated
80 A/m5 100 &T 1 G - Susceptibility
Magnetic Field
8A/m 3 I O ~ T 00 mG -
1.7 AIM
ki -
800 mA/m a 1 @T 10mG
340 mA/M
P
80mNm 2
0 100nT

3
1 mG - +
DO-
8 m N m cu 10nT 100pG - 20.5a '

10pG -
,E
800pNm 3 1 nT

1 pG -
Q)
80 pA/m 3 100 pT
E 15
I I I I
2
1 I
30
I
8pNm 10pT .1 pG

kHz MHz

Figure B 1. EM/ Test Limits (Continued)

145
 1. Report No.
DOT/l?AA/CT-86/40
2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient'sCatalog No. .
4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date
Aircraft Electromagnetic Compatibility June 1987
6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author@) 8. Performing Organization Reporl No.

C. A. Clarke, W.E. Larsen D6-53840
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No.
Boeinn Commercial Aimlane ComDanv 1 -

P.O.Bix 3707 11. Contract or Grant No.

Seattle, WA 98124 NAS2-12261
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address' Final Report;
U.S.Department of Transportation September 1985 to
Federal Aviation Administration June 1987
Bchnical Center 14. Sponsoring Agency Code
Atlantic City Airport, NJ 08405

This aircra€t electromagnetic compatibility document is for those individuals associated with
the engineering design and test of commercial aircraft. The document illustrates aircraft
architecture, electromagnetic interference environments, electromagnetic compatibility
protection techniques, program specifications, tasks, and verification and validation
procedures. The environments of 400-Hz power, electrical transients, and radio frequency
fields are portrayed and related to thresholds of avionics electronics. Five layers of protection
for avionics are defined. Recognition is given to some present-day electromagnetic
compatibility weaknesses and issues which serve to re-emphasize the importance of EMC
verification of equipment and parts, and their ultimate EMC validation on the aircraft.
Proven standards of grounding, bonding, shielding, wiring, and packaging are laid out to help
provide a foundation for a comprehensive approach to successful future aircraft design and an
understanding of cost-effective EMC in an aircraft setting. The bibliography contains
excellent in-depth articles on specific aspects of electromagnetic compatibility for those who
desire further study.

17. Key Words (Suggested by Author@)) 18. Distribution Statement

Electromagnetic Compatibility, This document is available to the U.S.public
Electromagnetic Interference, through National Technical Information
Bonding, Grounding, Shielding, Wiring Service, Springfield, VA 22161

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price